Open Kioku Search Code

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds that it's read-only and explains mode-specific behavior (graph mode searches indexed graph-node documents). No contradictions; extra context on modes enhances transparency.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. No wasted words.

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 an output schema exists, the description adequately covers everything needed: it explains both modes, usage conditions, and parameter defaults. No gaps remain for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline 3. Description adds value by clarifying that mode defaults to 'code' and that limit is capped at 100. It also explains what graph mode searches ('indexed graph-node identifiers, qualified names, ...'), which is not fully captured in schema enum 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 it performs 'lexical BM25 search across indexed code chunks' and specifies two modes: code and graph. It distinguishes from sibling tools like semantic_search, hybrid_search, and regex_search, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 tells when to use this tool ('exact identifiers, terms, routes, or config keys') and when to prefer alternatives: semantic_search for conceptual queries, hybrid_search for both, regex_search for patterns. Provides clear selection criteria.

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