search_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it discloses two important traits: deprecated status and that document content is excluded from results by default. It does not cover pagination, result limits, or auth requirements, but the content-exclusion note is the key non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the deprecation warning, then the replacement route, then the content caveat. No filler and every sentence earns 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 single-parameter deprecated wrapper with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, migration path, and the notable return-content caveat. Only the query parameter's semantics remain undocumented.

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% and the single 'query' parameter has no documentation. The description only indirectly hints at the parameter by referencing query_documents' 'query' argument; it adds no syntax, format, or matching-semantics detail for this tool's own parameter.

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 and resource ('full-text document search') and immediately frames it as a deprecated compatibility wrapper, which lets an agent distinguish it from the live sibling, query_documents, without opening any schema.

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 names the alternative ('Use query_documents with the query argument for new integrations') and gives a second routing rule ('Use get_document_content to retrieve content when needed'). Both the when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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