search_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explains the search behavior and output contents, including similarity scores and source files, but does not explicitly state side effects, read-only guarantees, or error handling. This leaves some behavioral details unstated.

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 concise and well structured. It states the main purpose, summarizes the return content, and provides the key conditional usage note without unnecessary detail or 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?

The description is mostly complete for a semantic search tool: it covers the query, collection behavior, and result content. However, the lack of explanation for top_k leaves a meaningful gap, since an agent cannot confidently know how many results to expect without inferring it.

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 input schema provides no parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It explains the query and collection parameters reasonably, including multi-collection behavior, but does not explain top_k or its default meaning. This is a notable gap in parameter semantics.

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 performs semantic search over indexed documents and returns relevant passages with similarity scores and source files. It is distinct from the sibling listing tools, which focus on enumerating sources and collections rather than searching content.

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 gives practical guidance for multi-collection mode, telling users to specify a collection or leave it empty to search all collections. It does not explicitly name sibling tools as alternatives, but the conditional usage instruction is clear enough for typical search scenarios.

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