Search the Stablevoy documentation

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description adds behavior beyond that: a hard result cap of 5 sections, the exact fields returned, empty-result semantics, no API key requirement, and a one-hour page cache so repeat searches are free. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs and none of them duplicate the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the result shape, then usage, then the get_doc handoff and cache note. The topical enumeration is long but serves disambiguation against ten sibling tools; a small amount of trimming (the plugin/recovery tail) would tighten it without loss.

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?

With one simple parameter, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers everything needed: what is searched, what comes back, how many, what empty means, and where to go next. Nothing required to call it correctly is missing.

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 is 100% and the schema already documents the query parameter with an example, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond it by prescribing query style — "a few plain words" with examples like "webhook signature" — which shapes how the agent should formulate input rather than just what the field is.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Searches the Stablevoy documentation") and immediately defines the result granularity (up to 5 matching sections) plus the fields returned. It explicitly separates itself from the sibling get_doc by noting that get_doc with a path reads the whole page.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance with concrete topic coverage (connecting a shop, creating a store, webhooks and signatures, networks and fees, widget, plugins, recovery) and names the alternative get_doc for full-page reads. It also handles the failure path — an empty list means no match, retry with other words.

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