wiki_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does state the return format (title, file path, snippet), which is useful. However, it omits the team_id scoping behavior and limit enforcement, and does not explicitly confirm read-only nature or any prerequisites. Minimal but not misleading.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences: 'Search wiki pages by content. Returns matching pages with title, file path, and a snippet. Use this to find documentation relevant to a topic.' Every sentence contributes meaning with no fluff or 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?

No output schema exists, so the description must explain return values, which it does. However, it omits important operational context such as team_id isolation and limit behavior, which are needed for correct invocation. The description is adequate for simple use but incomplete for full self-sufficiency.

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 67% (query and team_id have descriptions, limit does not). The tool description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond implying query is content search. The limit parameter is left undocumented in both schema and description, and there is no explanation of FTS5 syntax or team isolation semantics in the description.

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 wiki pages by content,' specifying both the verb and the resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like wiki_get or wiki_ingest by focusing on content-based search and return of title, file path, and snippet. The phrase 'Use this to find documentation relevant to a topic' reinforces the specific purpose.

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 provides explicit context: 'Use this to find documentation relevant to a topic.' However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or name alternative tools for different scenarios, such as retrieving a specific page with wiki_get or general search with search. Lacks exclusions but gives clear usage.

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