search_ui5_sdk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions returning 'summaries with examples' which gives some behavioral context, but doesn't disclose important traits like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or how results are structured. The description is minimal and lacks behavioral details.

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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information about what the tool does.

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 tool has an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values) but no annotations and poor schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter guidance, behavioral context, and sibling differentiation needed for a search tool with complex parameters.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 4 parameters (including a complex nested cache object), the description provides no parameter information. It doesn't mention the query parameter, maxResults, timeoutMs, or cache options, leaving all parameter semantics undocumented in both schema and description.

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 SAPUI5 SDK metadata and returns API/topic summaries with examples. It specifies the resource (SAPUI5 SDK metadata) and the action (search), but doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like search_mdn or search_project_files beyond the target resource.

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 like search_mdn or search_project_files. The description implies usage for SAPUI5-specific searches but doesn't explicitly state when this tool is preferred over other search tools.

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