Search the OrchestKit documentation. Use this first to find the right page for a question. Input: a query string. Returns a ranked list of pages with titles and URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | What to search for. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructiveness. The description adds the behavioral detail that it returns a ranked list of pages with titles and URLs, which is useful context beyond the schema. No contradictions; slight additional value.
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?
Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage order and input/output summary. Every sentence earns its place with zero redundancy or filler.
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 a simple search tool with one parameter, full schema coverage, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers what it does, when to use it, the input, and the output format. Nothing essential 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 100% and the parameter 'query' is adequately described in the schema. The description merely restates 'Input: a query string,' adding no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.
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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'OrchestKit documentation', distinguishing it from the sibling tool orchestkit_docs_get, which likely retrieves a specific page. The purpose is unambiguous.
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?
Explicitly advises to 'Use this first to find the right page for a question,' providing clear guidance on when to invoke this tool versus the sibling tool orchestkit_docs_get, which would be used afterward.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: search to find pages, get to retrieve content. No overlap.
Both tools follow the same 'orchestkit_docs_verb' pattern consistently.
Only two tools is minimal, but for a simple documentation retrieval scope it is acceptable. However, it feels thin.
Covers the basic workflow of searching and getting pages. Missing features like listing all pages or indexing, but search handles discovery.
