search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It describes behavioral traits such as returning recent history when query is empty, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The description is somewhat informative but leaves gaps.

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 well-structured with clear mode sections, front-loads the purpose, and uses bullet points for readability. Every sentence adds necessary information without 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 6 parameters, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers all parameters via modes and provides behavioral context. It does not explain return values (handled by output schema), so it is fairly complete 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each mode's relevant parameters (query, limit, min_usage_count, conversion_id, key) and their behavior (e.g., empty query returns history). This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, though not all parameters are equally detailed.

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 stored conversions, code patterns, and context data, and distinguishes three modes with specific purposes. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'context' (which likely retrieves context directly) and 'convert' (which performs conversions).

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 explains when to use each mode (conversions, patterns, context) and provides parameter hints (e.g., empty query returns recent history for conversions). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus alternative tools like 'context' or 'analyze'.

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