search_knowledge_base

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic search function and does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, or limitations. This is a gap for a tool whose safety profile is unknown.

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 and well-structured: a single leading sentence followed by a clean Args section. Every word earns its place, with no redundant 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 is simple, but the description lacks details about the return format or the scope of the knowledge base. Since there is no output schema, a bit more context on what 'passages' look like or how results are ordered would improve completeness.

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?

The description explicitly explains both parameters: 'query' as a natural-language search query and 'top_k' as the maximum number of results. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage, adding meaning beyond the raw types and default.

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 exactly what the tool does: 'Search the bundled knowledge base for passages relevant to a query.' It uses a specific verb ('search') and target resource ('bundled knowledge base'), and it is clearly distinct from sibling tools like 'calculate' and 'text_stats'.

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 clear usage context: use this tool to query the knowledge base with natural language. While it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, the context is self-evident and sufficient for a simple search tool.

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