搜索 Element Plus 组件文档

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the first full-library search requires crawling all component pages and indicates the result shape (related components and context snippets). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it omits details like caching or pagination behavior.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and the critical crawl caveat. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 search tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it names the result type (components and snippets) and flags the expensive first search. It could further explain how the components or max_results parameters affect results, but those are partially covered by the schema.

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?

The schema describes query and components, but max_results lacks a description and the tool description adds no extra parameter semantics. With 67% schema coverage, the description neither compensates for the gap nor repeats the schema, meriting the baseline 3.

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?

Description states '在 Element Plus 中文组件文档中搜索关键词，返回相关组件和上下文片段' – a specific verb (search), resource (Element Plus component docs), and output (components and snippets). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools get_component_doc and list_components.

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 gives clear context for when the tool is used (searching keywords across docs) and includes a practical caveat that '首次全库搜索需要抓取所有组件页面', warning about initial cost. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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