search_docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal extra context by mentioning 'source citations,' which hints at return behavior, but it does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or auth requirements.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded with the primary verb-object ('Search documentation') and adds key qualifiers. However, it is slightly too terse for a tool with six parameters and many siblings.

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's parameter count (6) and the existence of many sibling search tools, this description is under-specified. It does not clarify which documentation corpus is searched, what kinds of metadata filters are supported, or how results are structured. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but invocation context remains vague.

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 mentions 'optional metadata filters' collectively, which maps to tags, categories, content_kinds, and canonical_urls, but it does not explain any parameter individually, nor does it clarify the behavior of 'limit' or the required 'query'.

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 tool searches documentation, with optional metadata filters and source citations. This gives a specific verb and resource, but it does not distinguish it from sibling search tools like search_guides, search_troubleshooting, or search_api.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or why an agent might prefer search_docs over search_guides or find_examples. The context of sibling tools makes this omission notable.

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