search_document

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation by saying 'search and return content', but does not disclose potential behaviors such as error handling when file is not found, permissions required, or whether the operation is safe. More detail is needed for a tool with no annotations.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences plus an instruction. It front-loads the purpose and usage hint. Minor waste: the instruction about fetch_general could be more integrated, but overall efficient.

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?

Given no output schema and two parameters, the description covers usage and basic behavior but lacks details on return format or error conditions. It is adequate for a simple tool but could be more complete by describing what 'returns content' means.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are documented. The description adds that specifying a category targets a specific subdirectory, which provides context beyond the enum values in the schema. This enhances understanding of how the 'category' parameter works.

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?

The description clearly states it is used for answering questions about microCMS by searching documents and returning file contents. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools 'fetch_general' (which fetches general info) and 'list_documents' (which lists documents) by specifying it searches and returns content of a given file.

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 description explicitly advises to run 'fetch_general' first if not already done, providing a clear prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools beyond the prerequisite.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.