u1_search_runs

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Search' implies a read-only query and 'recent' scopes the time window, which is useful. However, it does not define 'recent', ordering, pagination, or whether the search matches partial values, so behavioral detail is incomplete.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence communicates the tool's purpose and core filter parameters with no filler. 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?

Despite low conceptual complexity, there is no annotation and no output schema, so the description must cover recent-window semantics, allowable filter values, and result expectations. It covers none of these, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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%, yet the description only restates the self-evident filter names (model, filament, status) and omits the limit parameter. It adds no detail about valid status values, matching semantics, or how limit affects results, so it does not compensate for the schema's silence.

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 states a specific action (search) on a specific resource (recent runs) with explicit filter dimensions (model, filament, status). It is clear, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling u1_list_runs, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose search_runs over alternatives such as u1_list_runs or u1_get_run. The intended use case (filtered discovery of recent runs) is only implied by the phrase 'by model, filament, and/or status'; no exclusions or competing-tool routing are provided.

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