truth_search

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

The description adds a meaningful behavioral note that Truth Social requires an authorized token, which is not present in the annotations. Since annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the added auth requirement provides valuable context without contradicting the structured metadata.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and immediately follows with an essential requirement. Every word earns its place, making it an excellent example of concise, well-structured documentation.

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 rich output schema and strong annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and key prerequisite (auth token). However, the lack of parameter semantics means the description is not fully self-sufficient. For a relatively simple search tool, it meets most needs but leaves room for improvement in explaining how to configure a search.

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 no descriptions for any parameters (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It only addresses the search_type parameter by listing statuses, accounts, and hashtags, but leaves query, limit, and resolve unexplained. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the full parameter behavior.

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 explicitly states the tool searches statuses, accounts, or hashtags, which aligns with the search_type enum and clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like truth_get_status or truth_lookup_user. The verb 'search' plus the resource types makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 this is a general-purpose search tool for multiple content types, providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool list makes it evident that dedicated retrieval tools exist for specific resources.

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