search_history

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses case-insensitive substring matching, searched fields, ordering by id ascending, and return structure. Does not mention performance or error conditions, but provides solid behavioral context.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with 'Search the timeline.' Structured Args and Returns sections with no wasted sentences. All information earns its place.

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 no annotations and low schema coverage, description covers search scope, parameters, and return format. Output schema exists, so return details are optional. Lacks details on pagination or performance, but adequate for typical search tool.

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 description must compensate. It explains each parameter: query as case-insensitive substring, limit as cap, search_files/search_tags as boolean inclusions, and defaults. Adds meaning beyond schema types.

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 timeline' with specific verb and resource, listing matched fields (task, summary, etc.), and distinguishes from siblings that create events, explain files, or get project story.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; however, siblings have distinct actions, so usage is implied. No exclusions or when-not advice.

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