smart-search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns documentation search URLs rather than actual content, and instructs to use WebFetch for real results, which is valuable behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with invalid queries/frameworks.

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 appropriately brief with two sentences that each serve distinct purposes: stating the tool's function and providing important usage instructions. The emoji and formatting are slightly decorative but don't detract significantly from clarity.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage for a 2-parameter tool, the description is incomplete. While it explains the URL-returning behavior, it lacks crucial information about parameter usage, expected outputs beyond URLs, and error handling for a search tool with many sibling alternatives.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 2 parameters (query, framework), the description provides no information about parameter meanings, formats, or constraints. The mention of frameworks like React/Vue/Node.js hints at possible values for the 'framework' parameter but doesn't explain its purpose or relationship to 'query'.

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 the tool searches official documentation for common frameworks and tools like React, Vue, and Node.js, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its many siblings (e.g., ai_search_web, ai_search_stackoverflow) beyond mentioning 'official documentation' versus other sources.

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 usage for searching official framework/tool documentation, but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ai_search_web or ai_search_stackoverflow. The mention that Claude Code should use WebFetch for the returned URLs provides some context but not clear selection criteria.

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