search_docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds genuine context on top: it returns markdown chunks with signatures, parameter descriptions, and code examples, and it explains the daily refresh from a CDN-backed source repo. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three short paragraphs each serve a distinct purpose: what the tool does, when to use it, and how current the docs are. The purpose is front-loaded and the text is efficient, though the daily-refresh sentence is somewhat optional for invocation.

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 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides enough context: return format, usage timing, platform scope, and SDK constraints. An agent can select and invoke this tool correctly without further clarification.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters clearly. The description adds useful query examples and reinforces the platform filter, but it does not meaningfully expand beyond what the schema provides; 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?

States a specific verb ('search') and resource ('bundled SDK reference docs for Klaviyo and Shopify methods'), and clarifies the output format ('ranked markdown chunks'). It explicitly differentiates from execute_code by framing itself as the pre-coding lookup step, and the 'search' vs 'read' distinction separates it from read_doc even without naming it.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to use this tool BEFORE writing code in execute_code and explains why: the SDK surface is constrained to registered methods. It does not explicitly state when to prefer read_doc instead, so it falls short of full when/when-not coverage.

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