Search Talonic Workspace

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, so the description does not repeat that. Beyond annotations, it explains that results are ranked and returned across all entity types in one call, and it details the result structure including a 'filterable' boolean for fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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 clear sections (STATUS, USE WHEN, DO NOT USE WHEN, TIP) and no redundant sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and uses bullet points effectively. Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity (search across multiple entity types), the schema and annotations are adequate. The description explains the result structure (documents, fieldMatches, sources, schemas, fields) and the filterable flag, which is crucial for downstream tool usage. Since an output schema exists but is not shown, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the return format.

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% and the schema descriptions for 'query' and 'limit' are already informative (natural-language query, default limit 5). The description adds no additional parameter semantics; it only repeats the schema's information. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides sufficient meaning.

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 the user's Talonic workspace for documents, fields, sources, or schemas. It uses 'Search' as a specific verb and identifies the resource ('Talonic workspace'), distinguishing it from siblings like talonic_get_document (for specific IDs) and talonic_filter (for structured filters).

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 includes explicit 'USE WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN' sections, listing concrete scenarios such as conceptual queries, narrowing a workspace, or checking for documents about a topic. It also directly names alternative tools (talonic_get_document, talonic_filter, talonic_extract) for each exclusion case.

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