search_journal

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes a search operation (implied read-only), but does not disclose return format, pagination, ordering, or behavior for empty results. Minimal but acceptable for a simple search tool.

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?

Single sentence of 7 words, front-loaded with key information. No fluff; every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema, so description should clarify return content and behavior. Missing details on result format, sorting, or whether full entries are returned. Minimal for a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema.

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 100% with all parameters described. Description adds no extra meaning beyond listing filter types (keyword, tags, date range). Does not explain how filters combine (AND/OR logic) or default values. Baseline score is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states the action (search) and the resource (journal entries), specifying filters: keyword, tags, date range. It distinctly identifies the tool's purpose from siblings like 'list_recent_journal_entries' and 'get_todays_journal'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to prefer simple listing vs. searching. No exclusions or context about combining filters or expected use cases.

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