Search Messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, etc. The description adds no behavioral details beyond what annotations provide (e.g., no mention of pagination, rate limits, or result structure). It aligns but does not enhance transparency.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, front-loaded with 'Searches'. No redundant information. Every word adds value.

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?

With 6 parameters and existing output schema, the description covers the core functionality. It does not detail authentication (user_google_email) but that is required parameter. Minor gap: purpose of max_spaces is not mentioned, but overall complete for a search tool.

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?

Input schema coverage is 83%, so schema already explains most parameters. The description's mention of 'text content and/or time range' maps to query and time_filter but adds no new meaning. High coverage baseline is 3.

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 for messages in Google Chat spaces using text content and/or time range. The verb 'searches' and resource 'messages in Google Chat spaces' are specific and distinct from siblings like 'get_messages' (retrieval) and 'send_message' (sending).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_messages' or 'search_gmail_messages'. The context (Google Chat) is implied but not compared. Usage is somewhat clear from the name and resource, but explicit exclusions would improve.

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