search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: porter stemming and that structured mode still matches frontmatter. These go beyond the annotation and help the agent anticipate matching behavior.

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?

Two sentences with zero filler. Core purpose is front-loaded, and the technical detail (porter stemming, frontmatter) is packed efficiently. No redundancy with schema or annotations.

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 read-only search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential functionality and the key mode nuance. It doesn't describe result format or pagination, but the schema already documents limit and query format. Slightly more context on what 'structured' returns would improve completeness, but it's adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with all five parameters described. The description adds extra meaning by clarifying that 'structured' mode handles frontmatter queries, which enriches the mode parameter conceptually. It does not replicate schema descriptions but supplements them.

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?

Description clearly states it performs full-text search scoped to the current project, specifying the underlying mechanism (SQLite FTS5 porter stemming) and distinguishing from other tools. No sibling tool offers search, so it stands out unambiguously.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'scoped to this project' but doesn't mention any exclusion criteria or alternative tools. The distinction between 'text' and 'structured' modes is also unexplained in terms of when to pick each.

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