trawl_search_multi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that ranking uses reciprocal rank fusion and that omitting clients searches all available indices, which is useful behavioral context. But it does not state read-only safety, permissions, rate limits, or what the result set looks like.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and mechanism. There is no filler, and the default-client behavior is stated compactly.

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 five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain what 'clients' are, how mode presets work, how per-client top_k results are merged, or what the token budget affects. For a multi-client search with several configurable knobs, the description is too sparse to fully orient an agent.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, including clients, mode, top_k, and max_tokens. The description only reiterates the clients default behavior ('Omit clients to search all'), which is already covered by the schema, adding no new semantic detail beyond it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search across multiple clients' and adds 'with reciprocal rank fusion', which gives a concrete mechanism. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling search tools such as trawl_search, trawl_search_pool, or trawl_search_entities, leaving some ambiguity about which search endpoint to choose.

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 only guidance is 'Omit clients to search all', which is a parameter instruction rather than a when-to-use rule. The description provides no context on when this tool should be preferred over the many sibling search tools, nor any exclusions or alternatives.

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