yuque_rag_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose real behavioral traits: concurrent multi-path execution, deduplication by doc_id, and fetching full content of top-N docs, which is useful beyond a bare search label. However it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or what happens on empty results.

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?

Single dense sentence that front-loads the pipeline stages, with no filler. The trailing external-file reference is mildly unhelpful since the agent cannot read it inline, but the sentence itself is tight.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only behavioral source, yet it omits the return shape (does it return full doc bodies or just snippets when fetch_docs is low?) and any usage routing against sibling search tools. Adequate for the mechanics, incomplete for decision-making.

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 100%, so all five parameters are documented in the schema itself, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds only the LLM-generated keywords idea, which the schema already conveys; scope, creator, fetch_docs, and max_results get no extra meaning.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('RAG-enhanced search') and enumerates the pipeline: concurrent multi-path searches, dedup by doc_id, fetch top-N full doc content. It is clear what the tool does, but it never contrasts itself with the sibling yuque_search or yuque_web_search, leaving an agent to guess which search to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all — no condition distinguishing it from yuque_search, yuque_web_search, or yuque_list_docs. The only pointer is an external file reference ('详见 references/api/search_api.md'), which is not guidance an agent can act on inline.

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