trawl_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states the hybrid retrieval mechanism and that it searches across all indexed documents, but it does not state read-only safety, result format, ranking behavior, or limits, even though 'search' strongly implies a non-destructive read.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The scope and retrieval mechanism are stated immediately, and every part of the sentence contributes information.

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?

The tool has six parameters and sits in a very crowded family of search-related siblings, with no annotations and no output schema. The one-sentence description is incomplete for routing and invocation because it does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives or what result behavior to expect.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters, including mode, top_k, pool_name, max_tokens, and include_content. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource: search across all indexed documents. It also identifies the retrieval mechanism (hybrid BM25 + vector search). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as trawl_search_pool or trawl_search_multi, so it stops short of a 5.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the many other search tools, such as trawl_search_pool, trawl_search_multi, trawl_search_code, or trawl_search_entities. Any usage guidance is only implied by the word 'search' and the scope 'all indexed documents'.

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