session_search

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the tool performs a read-only full-text search and returns context snippets, but it does not mention scope limitations (e.g., current session vs. all historical sessions), result ordering, pagination, or any performance characteristics. This is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action (full-text search), the scope (all recorded tool outputs), and the return value (matching sessions with context snippets). Every word earns its place with 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?

The description covers the core purpose and return type, but without an output schema or annotations, it leaves gaps about result format, matching semantics (e.g., substring vs. regex), and potential limits. For a search tool with only three parameters, the description is minimally viable but not fully self-contained.

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 three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema, but it does frame the parameters as search and filter criteria, which is consistent with the schema. No extra insight is provided.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Full-text search across all recorded tool outputs.' It clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling search tools like session_find_address and session_find_function, which target specific fields rather than arbitrary output content.

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 phrase 'across all recorded tool outputs' implies a general-purpose search context, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over more targeted session tools. No alternatives or exclusion criteria are mentioned, leaving the usage guidance mostly implicit.

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