search_memories

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does clarify that broadening only affects reads ("this does not change writes") and that only permitted spaces are covered, but says nothing about result ordering, pagination, or permissions.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, so nothing is wasted on filler. However, phrases like "Search active space" and "Explicitly broaden across permitted spaces" are compressed to the point of ambiguity and would benefit from one clarifying clause.

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?

Six parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and undocumented fields: the description explains only the query strategy and the read-only nature of broadening. An agent still cannot tell what space_id or session_id do or what the results look like.

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 only 17% — just 'limit' is documented — so the description should compensate. It hints at 'broaden' semantics and query phrasing but leaves space_id, max_chars, and session_id entirely unexplained in both schema and 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?

States a specific verb ("Search") scoped to the "active space", which tells an agent this is a scoped retrieval tool rather than a broad listing. It does not distinguish itself from list_memories or prefetch_memories, which are close siblings in the toolset.

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?

Offers tactical query advice ("try shorter terms or synonyms when needed") and a condition for widening scope ("for other contexts"), which is genuine when-to-use guidance. It never names an alternative tool or says when not to search versus list or prefetch.

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