search_bookmarks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral details beyond annotations: collection_id 0 means all bookmarks, page numbering is zero-based, and default ordering differs between searches (relevance) and listings (newest first). This is valuable non-obvious context.

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?

Three compact sentences, no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded. Every sentence adds functional value.

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?

The description covers the most important defaults and scoping behavior, and the output schema handles return-value expectations. However, with six optional parameters and no schema-level descriptions, the lack of query syntax details and nested/per_page semantics leaves the tool only moderately complete for an agent.

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 compensate. It explains collection_id and page, and hints at sort behavior, but the query parameter is only referenced as 'native Raindrop.io syntax' without elaboration, and nested and per_page are left completely unexplained. The description only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 names the resource ('bookmarks') and the two modes ('List' or 'search') with a specific verb. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like list_collections and get_bookmark, even without reading their schemas.

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 description gives clear context for when the tool is appropriate: listing bookmarks or searching them with Raindrop.io syntax. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings or state when not to use it, but the intended use cases are unambiguous.

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