mop_search_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It describes the tool as a full-text search and returns a list of SearchResult objects, implying a read-only operation, but it does not mention any specific permissions, side effects, or limitations. For a simple search tool, this is adequate but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 PURPOSE, WHEN TO USE, WHEN NOT TO USE, Args, and Returns sections, each concise. The inclusion of 'ctx: FastMCP Context' is unnecessary and slightly noisy, but overall efficient.

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?

For a simple search tool with an output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers purpose, usage context, exclusions, and parameters. It does not detail collection options or result behavior, but it is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 must compensate. It lists Args with short German explanations (keyword: Suchbegriff, collection: Collection, max_results: Maximale Ergebnisse). However, these largely mirror the parameter names and add little semantic depth; 'ctx' is mentioned but not in 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 'Volltextsuche in MoP-Dokumenten' (full-text search in MoP documents) and defines PURPOSE as finding documents containing a specific term. It distinguishes itself from register search by explicitly stating WHEN NOT to use it for structured register search, directing to 'search_register()'.

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?

It includes explicit 'WHEN TO USE' (search for person, institution, topic; exploratory search on court practices) and 'WHEN NOT TO USE' (structured register search), naming an alternative tool. This provides clear selection guidance.

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