search_suprsend_documentation

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

The description indicates a read-only search operation, but the annotation destructiveHint=true directly contradicts this. This is a serious inconsistency that misleads the agent about the tool's side effects.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections (what, when to use, when not, returns, tips). Every sentence serves a purpose, and it is concise without unnecessary information.

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 return format (JSON array of {uri, snippet}) even though no output schema exists. Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of sibling tools for runtime operations, the description is complete.

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?

The single parameter 'query' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by providing usage tips (use precise terms, add synonyms), going beyond the schema.

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 it searches SuprSend product documentation for technical guidance, listing specific topics (APIs, SDKs, workflows, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying when NOT to use (runtime operations).

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 explicitly provides when-to-use scenarios (user asks how a feature works, need to verify behavior before write, debugging integration errors) and when-not-to-use (runtime operations). It also offers tips on query formulation and fallback to fetch_suprsend_documentation.

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