smart_search_conversation_messages_route

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond those annotations, such as pagination behavior, result ordering, or authentication requirements.

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 extremely short, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficiency. It provides only a title-like phrase and does not front-load any useful scope, constraints, or routing information.

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 presence of a close sibling search tool and four parameters, the description is not complete enough to guide correct invocation. It omits what makes this search 'smart', how it differs from text search, and any usage constraints beyond what the schema and annotations already provide.

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 has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the schema already documents cursor, agent_id, page_size, and text_query. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is the baseline when schema coverage is high.

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 simply restates the tool name/title as 'Smart Search Conversation Messages' rather than specifying a verb and resource with distinguishing detail. It implies searching conversation messages, but does not distinguish this from sibling text_search_conversation_messages_route.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. In particular, the sibling text_search_conversation_messages_route suggests a competing search mode, but the description gives no criteria for choosing between them.

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