Search messages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It conveys that the operation is a non-destructive full-text search and that it operates globally or per chat, but it does not disclose the result format, ordering, pagination behavior, or any limitations beyond the schema's limit field.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the core action and the key scoping distinction without redundantly repeating the tool name or title.

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 relatively simple search tool, the description is usable but not fully complete. It does not mention what the returned messages look like, whether results are ordered by relevance or date, or how it relates to get_messages as an alternative. The absence of an output schema makes some of this information valuable.

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 67%, covering query and chat. The description adds meaning by clarifying that chat restricts the search 'to one chat' versus all chats. The limit parameter is not described in prose, but its default/min/max constraints in the schema already communicate its numeric semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Full-text search across stored messages.' It also clarifies the scope ('in every chat, or in one chat'), which distinguishes it from a plain message-listing tool and positions it clearly among siblings.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when full-text search over stored messages is needed, with an optional single-chat restriction. It lacks explicit exclusions or named alternatives like get_messages, but the context is strong enough for an agent to infer the correct use.

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