Search shared sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds which fields are searched and the inline filter syntax, but says nothing about result ordering, ranking, result caps, or whether filters must appear in the query string versus using the separate author/this_repo_only parameters.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler: the first defines scope, the second supplies the non-obvious query syntax. Nothing to trim.

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?

With no output schema, the description should hint at what a result looks like and how matches are ordered or limited; it omits both. Adequate to invoke the tool, but leaves an agent guessing about result shape and the interaction between query filters and the author/this_repo_only parameters.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns a point by documenting the 'file:<path>' and 'branch:<name>' query-filter syntax, which goes beyond the schema's single example string and clarifies in-query filtering behavior.

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 a specific verb and resource (full-text search over shared sessions) and names the searched fields (titles, summaries, messages). It is clearly distinguishable from get_session or share_current_session, though it never contrasts itself with the closest sibling list_sessions.

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?

Usage is implied by 'full-text search' versus a listing tool, and the filter syntax hints at narrowing behavior. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over list_sessions or how to combine author/this_repo_only with the inline filters.

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