Find information in a shared AI knowledge base case-insensitively. Respect access controls and filter by optional space.
Search knowledge case-insensitively (ACL, optional space).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| space | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only "case-insensitively," and the cryptic "ACL" fragment raises more questions than it answers (is ACL enforced silently, or must the caller hold it?). Nothing on pagination or result ordering.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely short and front-loaded, with no filler sentences. However, the dangling parenthetical reads like an unfinished fragment rather than structured guidance, so brevity comes at the cost of clarity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
A 3-parameter search tool with no output schema and 0% schema coverage needs the description to carry matching semantics, scope, and result shape. The single fragment leaves required-vs-optional, ACL behavior, and limit semantics unexplained.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters. The description mentions "space" as optional (consistent with the schema) but adds no format, matching semantics, or guidance for "limit"; "ACL" is not a parameter at all. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a verb+resource ("Search knowledge") but "knowledge" is an ambiguous resource — it could overlap with list_documents/get_document. No sibling differentiation despite a crowded document-related sibling set.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The parenthetical "(ACL, optional space)" hints at scoping but never says when to prefer this over list_documents or get_document, nor what ACL means in practice (auto-filtered vs. required permission). No when/when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.