Search the grandMA3 Lua API

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Search the live ... descriptor' implies a read-only lookup and it discloses the return shape (name, arguments, returns), but it never explicitly confirms there are no side effects or that results reflect the running system.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler; the resource and scope are front-loaded, and the enumeration hint follows naturally. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description still conveys what is searched and what comes back (names, arguments, returns), which is enough for an agent to call it correctly. It stops short of naming the sibling it complements or confirming read-only behavior.

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 50% — the query parameter is documented in-schema, but the kind enum is not. The description compensates by explaining the two categories ('object-free functions' vs 'object methods') and the empty-query listing behavior, covering the meaning of both parameters even if it never spells out the 'all' enum value.

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 ('Search') and resource ('grandMA3 Lua API descriptor') and even specifies the fields searched (function name, arguments, return values) plus the two function categories. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling gma3_lua (which presumably executes Lua), so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Gives one concrete operational hint ('Leave query empty to list everything'), which tells the agent how to enumerate rather than search. It never states when to reach for this tool versus gma3_lua or gma3_help, so usage is only implied.

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