SearchDocument

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, side effects, and expectations. It only adds the word 'EXPERIMENTAL!' and the generic verb 'Search', which vaguely implies a read operation but does not state whether it mutates state, requires authentication, returns summaries or full documents, or has pagination/limits.

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 very short, but the core sentence is essentially a restatement of the tool name and the exclamation marks add noise. It is not padded or overly long, but it does not earn its place by providing substantive information beyond the name.

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 output schema, no annotations, and a family of similar document tools, the description should clarify what results look like, what 'search' means in this context, and how it differs from QueryDocument or QueryDocumentFull. None of this is present, so an agent cannot safely and correctly invoke the tool beyond guessing.

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 input schema is empty with zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameters exist.

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 phrase 'Search For a Document' merely restates the tool name and adds no detail about search criteria, scope, or return values. It does not differentiate the tool from sibling tools like QueryDocument or QueryDocumentFull, so an agent cannot determine what makes this search distinct.

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 given for when to use SearchDocument versus QueryDocument, QueryDocumentFull, or SearchEntity. There are no conditions, exclusions, or alternatives mentioned, leaving the agent to guess from the name alone.

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