Search Webhound Sessions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the tool as safe and non-destructive. The description adds the notion of 'semantic search,' which offers some behavioral nuance beyond annotations, but does not elaborate on other traits like response format or pagination. Given the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it omits necessary detail about parameters and usage. It is minimal but not well-structured to convey all needed information efficiently. The brevity here actually undermines completeness.

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 tool has two parameters (one required) and a vague description, the agent lacks sufficient context to invoke it correctly. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the parameter semantics are absent. The description is too thin for a tool with this complexity.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the input schema provides no hints about the meaning of 'query' or 'limit'. The description does not mention either parameter, forcing the agent to guess their semantics. This is a critical gap, as the tool has only two parameters and they are essential for correct invocation.

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 'Semantic search across prior Webhound sessions,' identifying the action ('semantic search') and resource ('prior Webhound sessions'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'webhound_list_sessions' (likely a listing) and 'webhound_get_session' (retrieval of one) by specifying a search paradigm.

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?

The description implies usage for searching sessions with a query, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'webhound_list_sessions' or 'webhound_get_session'. No exclusion criteria or context is provided, leaving the agent to infer from the name.

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