search_transcripts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the scope of the search (which AI tools are included) and the query parameter, but it does not disclose search behavior details such as case sensitivity, partial matching, ranking, or whether results are returned in any particular order. It also doesn't mention any authentication or rate limits. However, for a search tool, this is adequate basic transparency, but it could be more explicit about the search semantics.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It lists the AI tools explicitly, which is valuable but makes it slightly longer. There is no fluff, and it is front-loaded with the main action. It could be more structured by separating the tool list, but it is appropriately sized for the information it provides.

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's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description is partially complete. It explains the query parameter's purpose and scope but leaves the other three parameters undocumented, which is a notable gap. There is no output schema to indicate the return format, so an agent might not know what to expect. The description is adequate for basic use but not fully complete for agents needing parameter details or knowing how results are returned.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, meaning the description provides no parameter-level details. The tool name and description only explain the 'query' parameter implicitly; the other three parameters (agent, limit, include_archived) are not described at all. With 0% coverage, the description should compensate, but it doesn't. It would be helpful to explain that 'agent' filters by AI tool, 'limit' caps results, and 'include_archived' includes archived transcripts. Therefore, the description fails to add meaning for most parameters, but it does at least clarify the query's purpose.

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's purpose: searching transcripts from multiple specific AI tools for a given phrase. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('transcripts'), and lists the exact AI platforms covered. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_memories' (which searches memories) and 'read_transcript' (which likely reads a single transcript).

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 implicitly conveys when to use this tool: when you need to search across transcripts from the listed AI tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, such as using 'search_memories' for memory searches or 'read_transcript' for viewing a specific transcript. There is no explicit guidance on prerequisites or conditional use.

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