search

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: default mode, RRF fusion, chunk-level semantics, dedup behavior, unique parameter effects, fulltext note-level-only, and response format including context.next_actions. No contradictions.

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 fairly detailed (~150 words) but well-structured: starts with purpose, then mode explanations, unique behavior, fulltext limitation, and response format. Each sentence adds value, though slightly verbose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers response format and context.next_actions. It explains mode, unique parameter, and limitations. Minor gaps: pagination or sorting not mentioned, but overall complete for search tool.

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%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds significant meaning beyond schema: explains hybrid RRF, semantic vs fulltext, chunk-level dedup, unique parameter details, and response context. Adds value beyond bare 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 the tool searches vault notes and explains three search modes (hybrid, semantic, fulltext) with specific behaviors. It differentiates mode usage within the tool but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like list_notes or base_query.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use each search mode: hybrid for most queries, semantic for abstract, fulltext for exact phrases. It also explains the unique parameter behavior. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or alternatives among siblings.

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