Search Pinoox docs

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

The description discloses that it returns matching doc paths and GitHub URLs, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or safe, nor does it mention any authentication or rate limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden, and the disclosure is adequate but minimal.

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 that front-loads the action and result. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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 simplicity (2 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers purpose and return type. It could mention the default language, but the schema handles that. Overall complete.

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 parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema: it mentions 'keyword' aligning with query, but does not address the 'lang' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Search official Pinoox documentation by keyword.' It specifies the action (Search), the resource (documentation), and the return type (doc paths and GitHub URLs). This distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_doc or list_doc_topics.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fetch_doc or list_doc_topics. The description implies searching, but does not state when searching is appropriate or provide exclusions.

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