Search everything

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating results are 'grouped by kind and labeled,' but it does not explicitly mention the read-only nature, result ordering, or potential limitations beyond what the schema covers.

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 at two sentences with no redundant phrases. It front-loads the action and scope, then adds a relevant detail about output grouping, making every word earn its place.

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 simple search tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what is searched and how results are presented. While an output schema is absent, the description could include more structural details about results, but it is sufficient for correct tool selection and invocation, especially given sibling context.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with detailed descriptions (query and max_results), so the tool description need not add parameter semantics. The description adds no extra parameter detail, and the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action (search) and the resource (all corpora), enumerating the specific document types. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by emphasizing 'at once' and listing all three corpora, making its scope unambiguous.

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 communicates the primary use case: searching across every corpus simultaneously, which implies its use for broad queries. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when to prefer individual search tools or exclude this tool for single-corpus searches.

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