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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses important behavior: returns up to 10 of each kind, best match first, prefix matching, all words must match, no stemming, and exclusion of trashed tasks and deleted comments. These details materially affect how an agent should form queries and interpret 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?

The description is dense and front-loaded, starting with the search scope and return behavior before matching rules and alternatives. Every sentence adds useful information without waste.

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 one-parameter read-only search tool with no output schema, the description explains result ordering, result limits, matching rules, and exclusions. An agent has enough information to call it correctly and interpret the main return characteristics.

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?

Although the schema fully documents the single query parameter, the description adds essential semantics about how words are matched: prefixes, all-words-must-match, and no stemming. This goes well beyond the schema's generic 'Words to search for'.

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?

It states a specific verb+resource: full-text search across tasks, projects, and comments in the active workspace. It also distinguishes the tool from list_tasks by explaining when name-based lookup is preferable.

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 explicitly recommends this tool over list_tasks when looking for something by name, giving the agent a clear alternative and selection condition. The active-workspace scope and result limit further constrain appropriate usage.

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