ghl_conversation_ai_search_agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Search' implies a read-only listing operation, but nothing is disclosed about return format, pagination, search semantics, or side effects. Transparency is minimal.

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 short sentence with no extraneous text, making it very concise and front-loaded. However, the brevity results in under-specification, leaving important operational details unsaid.

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?

This is a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations. Even so, the description is too sparse: it doesn't explain what a 'Conversation AI agent' is in this context, how search works, what the return value looks like, or why limit is used. The description is incomplete.

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 describes the query parameter but not limit, and the tool description adds no meaning beyond the schema. 'Search' implies query relevance, but limit's role is unexplained. With 50% schema coverage and no compensation from the description, parameter semantics are weak.

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 uses the verb 'Search' and identifies the resource as 'Conversation AI agents', which clearly states the tool's action and subject. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ghl_conversation_ai_get_agent or ghl_agent_studio_get_agents, so it lacks full distinction.

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 provides no context for when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools, leaving an agent without guidance on selection.

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