init

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the tool initializes a configuration file, but omits critical side effects such as whether it creates/overwrites files, requires permissions, or affects existing configurations. The force parameter's overwrite behavior is only documented in the schema, not in the description.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by a clear use case. It contains zero wasteful words and is well-structured for quick parsing.

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?

This is a simple tool with 2 optional parameters fully described in the schema. The description covers purpose and usage context sufficiently for an init operation, but lacks behavioral details (e.g., what happens to existing config, server implications) that would make it fully self-contained. Given the schema richness, a score of 3 reflects 'minimum viable but with clear gaps'.

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% (both port and force have descriptions), so the tool description adds no additional parameter semantics. Per the rubric, the baseline score is 3 when schema fully covers parameters, and the description does not need to compensate.

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 uses the specific verb '初期化します' (initializes) with a concrete resource ('search-docsの設定ファイル' – search-docs configuration file), clearly stating its function. It also distinguishes from siblings like search and get_document by indicating it is a setup action for local project document search.

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 it: 'ローカルプロジェクトの文書を検索対象にする場合に実行してください' (run when you want to include local project documents as search targets). This provides clear contextual guidance, even though it does not name alternatives explicitly.

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