yuque_search_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by stating 'client-side search' and the fields matched, but it does not explain return format, pagination, or whether remote calls are made. The read-only nature is somewhat implied, but more detail would help.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds meaning, and the structure is appropriately sized for a search tool.

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 description omits critical context: what `namespace` refers to, what 'listed docs' means, and what the tool returns (full docs or metadata). With no annotations and no output schema, this leaves the agent uncertain about invocation and expected results.

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 clarifies that `query` matches title, slug, and description, but it leaves the required `namespace` parameter completely unexplained and does not elaborate on `limit` beyond schema defaults. This is a significant gap for correct invocation.

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 uses a specific verb 'search' and resource 'docs', and specifies the fields searched (title, slug, description). The qualifier 'client-side' provides some differentiation from the sibling `yuque_search_and_read`, but it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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 phrase 'over listed docs' implies a use case where docs are already fetched, giving some context. However, there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives like `yuque_search_and_read`, and no exclusions are mentioned.

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