editor_search_help

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It hints at opening a browser but does not mention side effects like launching an external browser, requiring internet access, or whether the tool returns any result synchronously. The behavioral profile is under-specified.

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 a single, concise sentence with no fluff or redundancy. Every word contributes to stating the core function, making it very efficient. However, the extreme brevity also contributes to the lack of contextual information scored elsewhere.

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?

For a tool with one required parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too skeletal. It fails to explain how 'query' is used, what the tool returns (if anything), or how it compares to sibling search tools. Critical context needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, and the description does not mention the 'query' parameter at all. The name 'query' might imply a search term, but no detail about format, expected content, or behavior is provided. The description completely fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 'Search Godot documentation in browser' clearly states the verb (Search) and resource (Godot documentation in browser), making the tool's purpose easy to understand. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling search tools like search_in_project or search_in_scripts, but the specificity of 'documentation in browser' provides reasonable distinction.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_in_project, search_in_scripts, or search_tools. There is no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or relationships to other tools.

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