roam_search_by_date

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context by requiring a call to roam_get_guidelines and warning that conventions change how results are read, going beyond what annotations and schema provide.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a critical exclusion and warning. Every sentence earns its place, and the formatting makes the important prerequisite prominent.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description plus schema is almost sufficient. It provides a mandatory guidelines call and exclusion, but could benefit from a brief note on result format or edge cases like end_date inclusivity.

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 provides 100% coverage for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific details, examples, or additional meaning beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches blocks/pages by creation or modification dates, and includes an explicit exclusion for daily pages with ordinal date titles. It is specific and actionable, but does not explicitly name sibling alternatives to differentiate from.

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 says 'Not for daily pages with ordinal date titles' (when-not) and instructs to call roam_get_guidelines once per session before using the tool (prerequisite). This provides clear usage context, even though it does not name an alternative tool.

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