search

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, lowering the bar. The description adds that search covers metadata and indexed fulltext, implying a read-only search but without additional context such as result limits or query syntax. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and a clear alternative. No wasted words; each sentence earns its place.

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 four parameters, no parameter semantics, and an output schema present, the description covers only the core keyword search behavior. It lacks explanation of filtering by tag or collection, limit semantics, or interaction with sibling fulltext tools, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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%, and the description only mentions 'by keywords', which adds meaning to the query parameter. The tag, limit, and collection parameters are entirely unexplained, so the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level documentation.

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 Zotero metadata and indexed fulltext by keywords. It distinguishes from lookup by directing users to use lookup for known citekeys, but does not differentiate from fulltext or fulltext_search siblings, so it is not fully distinguished.

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 advises using lookup for known citekeys, providing a clear exclusion and alternative. However, it does not mention when to use fulltext or fulltext_search instead, so guidance is partial.

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