Search family memories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description only restates the filter options already present in the schema (time window, person) and does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as result ordering, limits, or pagination. This is adequate but not exceptional.

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 two sentences, opens with the core action, and follows with relatable examples. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's simplicity, well-documented schema, and strong safety annotations, the description covers the main scope and usage context. The lack of an output schema could have been mitigated by describing the return format, but the purpose implies a list of posts/memories and the examples are sufficient for most cases.

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 provides 100% coverage for all three parameters with descriptive text, including the 'fuzzy name' note for personName. The description merely paraphrases these filter options, adding no extra semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 identifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'family posts and memories', with optional filters for person or time window. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recent_family_activity or find_family_member, and example queries reinforce the intended use.

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 description provides concrete example phrasings ('what did we do last summer', 'find the post about the lake trip') that clarify when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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