arcana_search

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

The description reveals the algorithmic nature (hybrid with weighted components) and mentions merging and ranking. However, it does not state that the tool is read-only, nor does it disclose any behavioral traits like rate limits or side effects. With no annotations, more detail would be beneficial.

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 extremely concise, using a clear 'Args' structure. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff. The weighting formula is efficiently presented.

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?

Given the complexity of hybrid search and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers the search behavior and parameters. It could mention ordering or pagination, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool.

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?

All three parameters are described: query as natural language, target_uri as optional scope, limit as max results with default. This adds meaning beyond the schema's minimal names. However, descriptions are concise and could include format constraints.

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 that the tool performs hybrid search combining semantic and FTS5 with a specific weighting formula. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like arcana_grep (pattern-based) and arcana_find (file find).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it or any prerequisites, leaving selection to the agent without context.

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