Single tool with basic definition but critical gaps in quality dimensions. Tool has a description and named parameters, but lacks structured output schema documentation, parameter descriptions are minimal, and no error handling guidance. The tool description (183 chars) is within acceptable range but parameters lack proper descriptions per the rubric baseline (100% of A+ tools have param descriptions). No input validation, no error recovery guidance, and no security considerations documented despite accepting external API calls.

• Add enum constraint for 'library' parameter with explicit list: ['langchain', 'openai', 'llama-index', 'uv']. Do not rely on runtime validation.
• Document each parameter with explicit descriptions: 'query' (free-text search string, required; e.g. "Publish a package"), 'library' (one of: langchain|openai|llama-index|uv).
• Define structured output schema in docstring: 'Returns: List of objects with fields {source_url: string, extracted_text: string, relevance_snippet: string}' rather than 'Summarized text from the docs with source links.'
• Replace ambiguous error responses ('No results found' as string) with structured error objects: {'status': 'no_results', 'message': 'No documentation found for query...', 'suggestion': 'Try a different query or library'} to enable LLM error recovery.
• Add parameter validation with actionable error messages: 'Invalid library: got "foo", must be one of: langchain, openai, llama-index, uv' instead of generic ValueError.
• Document timeout behavior: 'HTTP requests timeout after 30s. Transient network failures are retryable; persistent errors should prompt user to check query or library.'
• Add result limit documentation: 'Returns up to 2 documentation sources per search. Use multiple queries to gather broader context.'
• Move API keys to secure configuration (not dotenv in repo). Document secret injection via environment with clear scoping (read-only access to docs, no write permissions).