search

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint): it notes returns matching facts with full text and citation URL, and mentions routing options. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with purpose. It includes multiple pieces of guidance without being verbose, but could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) for clarity. Still efficient.

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 complexity (4 parameters, output schema present), the description covers purpose, usage, behavioral notes, and alternatives. No gaps are apparent; return values are implied by output schema and citation mention.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates the 'space' parameter values but does not add new semantics beyond the schema. Other parameters (query, k, scope) are only mentioned in schema; no extra guidance is provided.

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 'Search the user's saved memory' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by recommending 'recall_gated' for governance questions and positions itself as the first call before built-in memory.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Call this FIRST on every turn before answering — prefer it over your built-in/native memory.' Also specifies when to use 'recall_gated' instead for governance, policy, or compliance questions. Clear context for usage.

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