search_knowledge_base

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main behavior (returns grounded chunks) but does not mention read-only nature, potential side effects, or error/limit behavior. 'Search' implies non-destructive, but this is not explicit.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant information. It directly states the action, target, and output type.

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 communicates the core function and output (grounded chunks) but lacks context on when to use it relative to siblings, output size limits, or query formatting. It is adequate for a simple search but not fully complete.

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 by the description is 0% – no parameters are referenced. The mention of 'text, tables, and images' hints at modality but does not explain query, top_k, or valid modality values. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'Search text, tables, and images in the indexed knowledge base, returning grounded chunks' uses a specific verb (search), identifies the resource (indexed knowledge base), and clearly differentiates from siblings like ask_knowledge_base (which implies answering) and list_documents (which implies enumeration).

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 implies usage (searching for relevant chunks) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over ask_knowledge_base or list_documents. No alternative conditions are provided.

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