cloudscape_search_docs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the result is a list of files with relevance scores and not full content, which is useful. It does not discuss potential side effects (though search is likely read-only), result limits, or search semantics, so it is only minimally transparent.

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 compact and well-structured with separate Args and Returns sections. Every sentence contributes: purpose, usage guidance, return behavior, and an example query. No redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description is sufficient: it explains when to use it, the parameter, and the return nature. It could be slightly stronger by explicitly pointing to the sibling read tool for full content, but the content limitation already hints at the workflow.

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 schema has only a bare 'query' string with no description; the description compensates by providing the intended use ('The search term') and concrete examples ('collection preferences', 'table sorting props'). This adds meaning the schema lacks.

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 'Search' and identifies the resource ('Cloudscape documentation index') and the result (relevant files). It clearly distinguishes from sibling cloudscape_read_doc by focusing on path discovery rather than content retrieval.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool FIRST to find correct file paths and notes it does NOT return full content, which implies the sibling read tool should be used afterward. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative or state when not to use it beyond the content limitation.

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