search-knowledge

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate these. It adds minimal behavioral context (e.g., filtering by data source/version), but does not disclose additional traits like rate limits or response format.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and scope.

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 the low complexity, no output schema, and well-documented parameters, the description covers essential use. However, briefly mentioning what the search returns (e.g., snippets or metadata) would improve completeness.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description adds general context about filtering by data source and version, aligning with the dataSources parameter, but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 the action ('Search') and resource ('MongoDB Assistant knowledge base'), including specific content types (official documentation, expert guidance) and filtering options. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like aggregate or atlas-*, which are unrelated to knowledge base search.

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 implies usage context by specifying the knowledge base domain, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., list-knowledge-sources) or provide conditions for not using it.

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