search_datasheets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety and behavior. The description adds context about the semantic search nature and the limitation to previously extracted datasheets, which is useful but not extensive.

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 concise with three sentences: core purpose, usage guideline, and a clear alternative. Every sentence is informative and earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 search tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, scope limitations, usage guidance, and provides an example. It could mention result format or pagination, but the provided information is sufficient for effective agent 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description provides an example query ('low-noise LDO with PSRR above 70dB') which adds a small amount of guidance, but overall the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 the verb ('semantic search'), resource ('all extracted datasheets'), and scope ('across all extracted datasheets'). It also differentiates from the sibling tool search_parts by specifying that search_parts is for specific part numbers.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('best for broad spec-based discovery') and when not to ('only searches datasheets that have been previously extracted'). It also provides a clear alternative: 'use search_parts instead' for specific part numbers.

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