search_messages

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

No annotations provided, and description lacks behavioral details such as pagination behavior, ordering, or scope of search (e.g., across all conversations or specific). Schema hints at pagination via limit/offset, but description does not confirm or clarify.

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 is concise, but lacks structure. No front-loading of key details or separation of important constraints. It is too terse for a tool with multiple parameters and siblings.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not specify result format, search scope, or ordering, leaving an agent with insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 descriptions cover all parameters with 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides; it does not explain how parameters like sender or pagination affect results.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'search' and resource 'messages' with the specific action of matching a keyword, differentiating it from message listing or receiving tools. However, it could be more precise about the scope (e.g., all conversations or a specific one).

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 guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like list_conversations, export_messages, or receive_messages. No exclusion criteria or context for when this search is appropriate.

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