search_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior: Slack search operator support, the 1-100 count bound, and what the two sort modes mean. It omits the search's coverage (DM/private channel scope), permission requirements, and pagination/result-cap 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?

Front-loaded with the one-line purpose, then a compact args list that earns its place because the schema has zero descriptions. No filler sentences or redundancy.

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-value explanation is not required, and parameters are fully covered. What's missing for a search tool with no annotations is scope and access context — whether results span DMs/private channels and whether the workspace must be pre-authorized via check_access.

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 0%, so all meaning must come from the description — and it documents all four parameters: workspace as a configured name, query with a concrete operator example, count as a 1-100 match cap, and sort's two values explained semantically ('score' = relevance, 'timestamp' = newest first). That is meaningfully more than the bare schema titles.

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 ("Search messages") plus the scope ("across a workspace"), and notes Slack search operators are supported. That distinguishes it from the targeted-read siblings like read_channel and read_thread, though it never names them explicitly.

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 rather than stated: the query example ('in:#general from:@alice variant calling') signals this is the tool for filtered/keyword retrieval across a workspace. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over read_channel, read_thread, or list_channels, and no prerequisites are mentioned.

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