bale_search_dialogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It notes that only 'active' dialogs are covered, which is a genuine scoping trait, but it says nothing about session/auth requirements, whether results are cached or fetched live, or pagination behavior of the search.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical about language support is placed after the core action, which is a sensible ordering, though the term 'active' could be tightened.

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 the query semantics are covered. However, with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an undocumented limit parameter, the definition leaves too much unsaid for an agent to call it confidently.

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 the description must compensate. It usefully explains that 'query' accepts a name/title (in Persian or English) or a chat ID, which is meaningful beyond the bare 'string' in the schema, but the 'limit' parameter and its default of 50 are never addressed.

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 (search) and resource (active dialogs, groups, conversations) plus the match keys, which distinguishes it from the sibling bale_get_dialogs by implying lookup rather than enumeration. It stops short of an explicit contrast with that sibling, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 only implied: the mention of matching by name/title or chat ID suggests 'use when you know what you're looking for'. There is no statement of when to prefer this over bale_get_dialogs, nor any prerequisites about an active session.

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