haops_search_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states it searches by keyword but does not disclose additional behaviors like result ordering, pagination, or search scope (e.g., only article content vs. titles). This is insufficient for a search operation.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the action. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise with no filler.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It lacks details on result format, limitations (e.g., pagination, matching algorithm), and does not differentiate from other search tools like haops_search_discussion. Completeness is low.

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% with the 'query' parameter described as 'Search query string'. The description adds 'by keyword', which slightly reinforces usage but does not provide significant extra meaning 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 the verb 'Search' and resource 'help articles', and specifies the output 'matching articles with titles and snippets'. This distinguishes it from siblings like haops_get_help_article (retrieval by id) and haops_list_help_articles (listing all).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as haops_get_help_article for exact retrieval or haops_list_help_articles for browsing. The description lacks context for tool selection.

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