Query GeoGebra Commands

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only search (no side effects mentioned) but does not state what the return value looks like, whether it returns multiple results, or whether it executes commands. Some context is present, but the behavior after invocation is unclear.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then a usage note. No filler, every phrase adds value.

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 there is no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns. It does not explicitly say it returns matching commands or syntax examples, though the usage hint implies it. The tool has 4 parameters with enums, and the description only partially covers their semantics, so completeness is moderate.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It does explain that the query parameter searches across several fields and mentions 'scopes', which loosely aligns with the scope parameter. However, it does not explain topN (result limit) or locale (language specificity), leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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 a 'bundled GeoGebra command reference' by multiple dimensions (name, localized name, syntax, examples, tags, scopes). It distinguishes itself from the sibling ggb_eval_command by explicitly positioning it as a pre-search tool for syntax verification.

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?

Provides an explicit usage directive: 'Use this before ggb_eval_command when command syntax is uncertain.' This names the alternative tool and the condition for use, which is strong guidance for an agent.

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