Search Docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior: keyword-based matching, Markdown output, and the docs-only scope limit. It does not mention ranking behavior or failure modes on no matches, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct information: what it searches, when to use it with examples, and what it returns plus the follow-up path. Nothing is redundant and the scope/what-it-does comes first.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing the return value ('best-matching sections with their headings', Markdown), which is exactly what an agent needs to consume the result. Scope, usage, and follow-up path are all covered for a simple two-parameter search tool.

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%, so both parameters are documented in the schema itself, and the description adds no syntax or format detail for 'query' or 'limit' beyond what is already there. The example queries offer marginal illustration but no new parameter semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Keyword-search the full Porkbun API reference') plus the return shape (relevant sections as Markdown). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings list_doc_topics and read_doc, which it explicitly references.

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?

Names the trigger context ('how do I…' questions) and gives three concrete example queries. It also routes the agent forward to read_doc for a full topic page and bounds scope to 'Porkbun's own docs only', so there is no ambiguity about when to pick this tool.

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