hebbrix_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return format and that it is a search operation, but lacks details about side effects, idempotency, or authentication. The behavior is not contradicted.

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?

Two sentences covering purpose, usage guideline, and return format. No extraneous words, front-loaded. Could be slightly more descriptive without harming conciseness.

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 no schema descriptions or annotations, the description provides adequate context for the tool's primary function but omits explanation of parameters like collection_id and limit. Output format is partially described.

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%, and the tool description does not explain individual parameters (query, limit, collection_id). It only mentions 'query' in the return format, not as an input. This does little to add meaning beyond the schema.

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 performs 'semantic search over memories' and specifies when to use it ('before answering questions that depend on prior context, decisions, or user preferences'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hebbrix_get or hebbrix_list.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Always call this BEFORE answering questions that depend on prior context, decisions, or user preferences.' While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the positive guidance is strong and implies its primary use case.

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