search_experience

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states that the query is strictly search input (not instructions), but does not mention idempotency, safety, authentication, or rate limits. The absence of such context limits transparency.

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 four sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the purpose, provides an example, explains key parameters, and clarifies query handling. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has 4 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and two filter parameters. However, it omits explanation of the 'limit' parameter and any pagination details, which are relevant for an AI agent's effective use.

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 explains that 'kinds' restricts item types and 'tags' is an AND-filter, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain 'query' format or 'limit', leaving gaps.

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 that the tool searches across roles, projects, bullets, and skills, providing an example query. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_* and get_* by positioning itself as a search entry point, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 notes that this is the 'main entry point' for natural language queries and explains the behavior of the 'kinds' and 'tags' filters. However, it does not provide guidance on when not to use it or suggest alternatives from the sibling tools.

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