aiworkhub_manager_kb_search

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the description only needs to add context. "Bounded" gestures at a result cap but never says what the bound is, how results are ranked, or whether the search spans the whole KB or a scope; the single word does little work.

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 words plus a prefix is certainly front-loaded and waste-free, but it is under-specified rather than concise; the brevity costs more in missing meaning than it saves in tokens.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, but for a 2-parameter registered tool sitting among many retrieval siblings, the definition leaves both query semantics and sibling routing entirely unaddressed. An agent could invoke it, but not confidently choose it.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load for both parameters and does not: nothing explains whether "query" is keyword, phrase, or semantic, nor what "limit" (default 8) actually caps. "Bounded" is the only nod toward the limit 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?

"KB search" gives a recognizable verb+resource, but "bounded canonical" is unexplained jargon and nothing distinguishes this from the many siblings that also retrieve KB/graph data (kb_get, kb_related, context_graph_search, ai_memory_search). An agent knows roughly what it does but not how it differs.

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 "MANAGER READ:" prefix hints at a privileged read scope, but there is no statement of when to use this search versus kb_get, kb_related, or context_graph_search. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no routing guidance.

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