search_docs

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it searches a domain and returns results, but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or result structure beyond the output schema. With annotations carrying the safety profile, the description's added value is moderate.

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 concise with 6 sentences, front-loading the purpose, then clearly listing parameter descriptions and return value. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, both described), annotations covering behavioral aspects, and existence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context for the agent to correctly select and invoke the tool. It covers purpose, parameters, and return high-level description.

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 bears full burden. It provides meaningful explanations for both parameters: 'query: What you're looking for' and 'domain: The domain to search (e.g. 'docs.python.org', 'stackoverflow.com').' The query description is slightly vague but adequate, and the domain example adds clarity.

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 for technical documentation on a specific domain, using a specific verb ('searches') and resource ('technical documentation'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like web_search (general web search) and fetch_page (page retrieval).

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 clearly implies usage for domain-specific searches, providing a clear context but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative comparisons. It states it searches 'specifically for technical documentation... on a specific domain,' which guides the agent to use it over general search when targeting a particular site.

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