roam_search_by_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds a meaningful behavioral nuance: graph conventions can change how results are read, not just written, and guidelines must be fetched once per session. This goes beyond the annotations and aids correct usage.

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: the first states the purpose, the second delivers a critical usage prerequisite. It is front-loaded, concise, and every word adds value. No redundancy.

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 the tool's moderate complexity and full schema coverage, the description is complete for selection and invocation. It discloses the prerequisite call, the scope options, and the status filter. It does not describe return format, but search tools without output schema are often self-explanatory. Minor gap: no mention of exclude/include filters beyond the schema, but those are documented there.

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 with detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate. The scope behavior (all pages vs specific page) is already captured in the page_title_uid parameter description.

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 it searches for blocks by status (TODO/DONE) across all pages or a specific page. The verb 'search' plus resource 'blocks' and filter 'status' makes the purpose specific and distinguishes it from sibling search tools like roam_search_by_text or roam_search_by_date.

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 provides an explicit prerequisite: call roam_get_guidelines before using this tool, even for reads. It also mentions the optional scope (all pages vs a specific page). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative search tools or state when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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