search_docs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that keyword search is case-insensitive and that semantic search depends on local embeddings (DOCS_EMBEDDING_PROVIDER=local), which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, or whether the operation is read-only, leaving gaps for a search tool.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite four parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral context (mode switches) but omits return value details and error conditions. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but leaves gaps typical of an undisclosed output format.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds a small behavioral detail (case-insensitivity) and restates the mode default already present in the schema, but does not significantly deepen understanding of parameters beyond the schema definitions.

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 searches documentation by text, using the verb 'search' and a specific resource ('documentation'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools (list_docs, read_doc, write_doc, etc.) by its search functionality, and the mode detail (semantic vs. keyword) adds specificity.

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 provides clear context on when to use semantic vs. keyword search based on the environment variable, which is helpful for mode selection. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., list_docs or read_doc), relegating tool selection to implication rather than explicit guidance.

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