capture_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to state if the tool is read-only, has side effects, or any rate limits. The only behavioral hint is 'BM25 search,' implying a read operation, but this is implicit.

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 extremely concise—one sentence and a short result list. Every word adds value with no redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'sandboxed tool outputs' are, how session_id and project_root affect the search, or what the search algorithm does beyond BM25. The agent lacks necessary context to use the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 60%, with descriptions for query, limit, and tool_name. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. It does mention return fields, which may hint at output but not parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate given moderate 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 clearly states the tool performs BM25 search across sandboxed tool outputs, which is a specific verb and resource. It also lists return fields (id, snippet, bytes). While it distinguishes from sibling tools like capture_list and search_codebase, it doesn't explicitly differentiate its scope from, for example, capture_aggregate or search_in_symbols.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios. Siblings like capture_get or search_codebase exist but the description does not help an agent choose between them.

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