noir_search_docs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the tool's purpose. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, read-only nature, or any side effects. The word 'Search' implies read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 verb 'Search' and resource, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: purpose and usage examples.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain search behavior (e.g., exact vs fuzzy matching), result format, pagination, or how section parameter affects results. This leaves the agent guessing about important usage details.

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% (all three parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it does not compensate or improve.

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 'Search Noir documentation' with specific verb and resource, and includes examples of content types (language guides, tutorials, API documentation). It distinguishes from sibling tools like noir_search_code and noir_search_stdlib by its focus on documentation.

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 says 'Use for finding language guides, tutorials, and API documentation,' providing general context. However, it does not specify when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives among the nine sibling tools, only implicitly differentiating by name.

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