guide_search

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states search modes but does not disclose behavioral traits like result ranking, pagination, or whether filters are exact or fuzzy. Lacks details that would help an agent understand the tool's behavior.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information (search, guides, modes). Every word earns its place; no unnecessary text.

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?

Despite output schema existing, the description is too brief for a complex tool with multiple search modes and optional filters. It fails to mention paging, result structure, or how filters interact. Incomplete given 0% parameter descriptions and lack of annotations.

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%; description adds meaning by explaining search_mode via the four modes listed. However, other parameters like limit, guides, platforms, categories are not explained beyond their schema titles and constraints. Baseline 3 with partial compensation.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'OWASP testing guides', and specifies the search modes (exact id, full-text, semantic, hybrid), making it distinct from sibling tools like guide_get_test or guide_list_tests.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The description only implies usage for searching across guides.

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