Search Nirvana Tasks

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers key behaviors: filter requirement, automatic exclusions, and how to include logged tasks. It lacks details on pagination or result limits, but these are common for search tools.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by essential usage constraints. No unnecessary detail.

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 simple schema and no output schema, the description provides necessary context for a search tool: purpose, constraints, exclusions, and a special use case. It is complete for its complexity level, though it could mention that it is the only multi-filter tool among siblings.

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 descriptions cover all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by stating the 'at least one filter' requirement and the synergy between text and state='logged' for history mining, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 Nirvana tasks with any combination of filters', specifying the verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools that are single-state getters.

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 requires at least one filter and explains exclusions (trashed, deleted, logged by default). It also advises when to use state='logged' with text search. However, it doesn't directly compare to sibling tools or state when not to use.

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