Search kweenkl notification channels and messages. Use this to find channels by name or search through notification history.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query to find channels or notifications |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, openWorld (unpredictable results). Description adds that it searches channels and messages but lacks details on result format, pagination, or performance characteristics.
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?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
Tool is simple with one param and no output schema. Annotations cover safety, and description covers purpose and usage. Minor omission: no mention of return type or pagination, but acceptable for a search tool.
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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description mirrors schema description 'Search query to find channels or notifications', adding no further meaning beyond what's in the schema.
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 clearly states verb 'Search' and resource 'kweenkl notification channels and messages', and provides specific use cases: find channels by name or search history. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'fetch', which likely retrieves specific items.
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 tells when to use: 'find channels by name or search through notification history'. While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the context is clear for a simple search tool with few siblings.
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 clearly distinct purpose: fetch retrieves by ID, kweenkl sends notifications, login and login_check handle auth, status checks connectivity, and search queries history. No ambiguity.
Tools mix generic verbs like 'fetch' and 'search' with the 'kweenkl_' prefix for auth and status tools, and 'kweenkl' as a standalone verb tool. This is somewhat inconsistent but still readable.
6 tools is well-scoped for a notification service. Each tool serves a needed function without bloat.
Lacks channel management tools (create, update, delete) and a listing tool beyond search. Users cannot fully manage the lifecycle of channels or notifications.
