Search Notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, and the description adds valuable behavior: returns compact summaries for large result sets, lacks owner filtering, and returns related_to fields that can construct app URLs. This goes beyond the structured data.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. Each sentence provides distinct value—search behavior, limitation, and output usage—without 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?

For a search tool with 7 parameters and an output schema, the description covers key contextual aspects: purpose, compact output, a limitation, and a use case for the related fields. It does not discuss filtering details, but those are implied by the schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that related_to and related_to_type values can be used to build Recruit CRM app URLs, providing extra context beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

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 the tool searches Recruit CRM notes, which distinguishes it from siblings like search_candidates or search_tasks. It also mentions compact summaries and no owner filtering, further specifying its scope.

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 indicates it is meant for searching notes, especially large result sets, and explicitly notes it does not support owner filtering. However, it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit when/when-not guidance compared to sibling search tools.

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