Search indexed Markdown, text, and reStructuredText documents using BM25 to retrieve top source chunks with relevance scores and citation-ready text.
Search the indexed documents with BM25. Returns the top k chunks with their source, relevance score and text, so answers can cite the source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| k | No | ||
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the ranking method (BM25) and the returned fields (source, relevance score, text). It omits permissions, limits, empty-result behavior, and other operational constraints, which is a moderate gap for a search tool.
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?
Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by return behavior. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.
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?
For a simple two-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, mechanism, and result shape well. The main missing piece is explicit routing against list_sources and fuller parameter constraints.
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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that k controls the number of top chunks returned and that query is the search input, but gives no default, range, or query syntax details.
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 specific verb and resource: search indexed documents using BM25. This clearly distinguishes it in spirit from list_sources, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling.
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 phrase 'so answers can cite the source' implies the retrieval use case, but the description does not say when to use search_docs versus list_sources or any other alternative. Usage is inferable but not guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.