Search Recording

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds real behavioral context the agent couldn't infer: hits are timecoded, ranked best-first, secrets are masked in output, and frames are omitted by default.

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?

A single dense sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and every clause earning its place; zero padding.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the description covers indexing source, ranking, masking and frame behavior. Slightly thin on prerequisites (the recording must already be indexed) but otherwise complete.

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 the schema documents all six parameters including defaults and limits. The description only nudges on the images parameter ('No frames unless asked') and adds nothing for query, regex, input or sessionId.

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?

Specific verb+resource: searches an index_recording timeline across screen text, events, markers and transcript, which ties it to the index_recording sibling. It doesn't distinguish itself from find_text, so it falls short of a 5.

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 'Search an index_recording timeline' and the caveat 'No frames unless asked' hints at when to request images. No explicit when/when-not, prerequisites, or named alternatives among the many siblings.

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