tool_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type (tool_reference blocks) and the deferred loading behavior, which is useful. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the nature of a search tool makes that implicit. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by scope, modes, return, and Args. It is efficient and well-structured, with no redundant sentences.

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?

Covers the tool's function, search scope, two modes, return type, and deferred loading. With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail the return structure further. All parameters are documented and the tool is simple enough that no additional context is required.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. The Args section explains each parameter's meaning: query semantics depend on use_regex, max_results range (1-10) and default, and use_regex purpose. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 for tools using BM25 or regex, explicitly specifying the resource and action. It differentiates from the sibling call_remote_tool by its focus on discovery rather than invocation.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use each search mode (natural language vs regex) via the use_regex flag. Does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over call_remote_tool, but the purpose is distinct enough for an agent to infer.

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