get_docs

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

The description implies a read-only operation by saying 'Search', but it lacks details on behavior such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or result format. With no annotations to supplement, the description is insufficiently transparent for an agent to fully understand side effects or constraints.

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 and well-structured, with separate sections for purpose, arguments, and returns. It avoids unnecessary words, though the placeholder {supported_libraries} suggests dynamic generation.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basics. However, the return value is only vaguely described as 'Text from the docs', leaving ambiguity about whether it returns a single result or multiple, and in what format.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so effectively by providing examples for both 'query' and 'library', clarifying what each parameter expects. This adds value beyond the bare 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 tool's purpose: 'Search the latest docs for a given query and library.' It specifies the verb 'search', the resource 'docs', and the required parameters 'query' and 'library'. Even without sibling tools, the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides context on when to use the tool by giving examples of valid queries and libraries (e.g., 'Chroma DB', 'langchain'). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but with no sibling tools, the guidance is adequate.

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