canvas_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful scope details such as searching every folder and including other chats' live boards and saved copies, but it does not describe result limits, ordering beyond 'this one first', permissions, or pagination behavior.

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 with no wasted words. The search scope is front-loaded and the next-step guidance follows immediately.

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 simple, one-optional-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers what it searches, where it searches, and what to do next. It could be more complete by stating the return shape or result limits, but it is largely adequate.

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% and the query parameter is fully documented in the schema ('Words that must all match; omit to list the latest'). The description adds that matching is by name or text, which is minor added context, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Find) and resource (boards) with a clear scope: every folder, this one first. It also distinguishes the follow-up action by naming canvas_open, though it does not explicitly contrast with other read/search siblings.

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 explains what to do with results ('Open with canvas_open {board} or {saved}') and implies this is a discovery step before opening. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative search tools.

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