Search Coda Docs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint as true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds that the tool returns matching docs with id, name, browserLink, which is helpful but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like scope or side effects beyond what annotations cover.

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: one sentence for purpose, followed by a clear parameter list and return value summary. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded, with no 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?

For a simple search tool with full parameter documentation, the description provides a complete picture: scope ('all accessible documents'), search target (title), return fields, and output format options. No output schema is needed given the description's return summary.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The description restates the parameters and adds that response_format can be 'markdown' or 'json', but the schema already specifies enumeration and defaults. Thus the description adds minimal new 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 'search across all accessible Coda documents by title keyword', specifying the verb (search) and resource (documents). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like coda_list_docs (list all) and coda_get_doc (get one doc).

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 implies usage for searching by title keyword but does not explicitly provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use, nor does it mention alternatives. No guidance on scenarios better served by other sibling tools.

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