search_articles

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search' and lists parameters, missing key aspects like permissions needed, rate limits, pagination, or whether results are cached. The output schema exists, so return details may be covered there, but the description adds little beyond the obvious.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose plus a parameter list. No wasted words. The structure as a docstring is clear and efficient.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It defines basic usage but omits search behavior details (wildcards, case sensitivity). With sibling tools for articles, it contextually fits, but an agent would need to infer or test search capabilities.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides brief semantics: query is a 'search string', max_results has a default, instance is optional. This is adequate but not detailed—e.g., no explanation of valid query formats, the role of instance, or how max_results affects results.

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 Knowledge Base articles,' identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from related sibling tools like get_article, which retrieves a single article. However, it lacks specifics on what fields are searched (title, body, tags) and the matching algorithm.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among siblings, there is get_article for specific ID, but no comparative advice. The description does not mention when not to use or any prerequisites.

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