komnet_searchFind substrings in live messages from subscribed rooms, covering only current activity. Use for real-time monitoring without reaching into history.
Substring search across subscribed rooms' live windows. Does not reach history — komnet_read with since does.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| room | No | Room id, e.g. 'architecture' | |
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already signals no mutation, and the description adds scope constraints (live windows only, no history). It does not detail pagination or result format, but the annotation lowers that burden.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by the key exclusion. No filler or redundancy.
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?
Provides purpose and boundary versus read, but omits return value expectations and parameter behavior. Since there is no output schema, some statement about what results look like would make it more complete.
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 limited: query has no description, limit has only constraints, and room is the only param with an example. The description does not compensate by explaining how these parameters affect the search.
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 it performs substring search across subscribed rooms' live windows, with a clear resource and action. It also distinguishes from history retrieval by explicitly saying it does not reach history.
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?
Names the alternative komnet_read explicitly and gives the condition ('with `since`') for accessing history. This gives clear when-to-use guidance versus the sibling tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.