ghl_search_conversations

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose return format, pagination, rate limits, or whether results include full conversation objects or summaries. It only lists filters, which is minimal and does not go beyond the obvious search behavior.

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?

One short sentence with no fluff, front-loaded with the action. However, the sentence includes an inaccurate 'date' filter, which is a content issue, but structural conciseness is achieved.

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?

For a search tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain what gets returned, how limit works, or what status values mean beyond the enum. The false 'date' filter makes the description less complete and potentially misleading.

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 description maps 'contact' to contactId, 'status' to status, and 'type' to lastMessageType, but also mentions 'date' which has no corresponding parameter. The undocumented parameters limit and status receive no explanation. With 60% schema coverage, it partially compensates but introduces a false parameter.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' with resource 'conversations' and lists filter dimensions (contact, status, type, date). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_conversation (fetch single) and get_messages. However, the 'date' filter is not in the schema, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ghl_get_conversation or ghl_get_messages. The description simply states the search action and filters, leaving the agent to infer use cases. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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