searchNotion

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the search covers pages, databases, and content, which is useful context. However, it does not mention any limitations, authentication requirements, or result format details. The description provides basic transparency but lacks deeper behavioral insights.

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, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource. There is no redundant or extraneous information, making it an model of conciseness.

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 simple tool design with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It does not explain return values or pagination, but it does hint at the content types returned. However, for a search tool, users might benefit from knowing result limits or search scope details. Overall, the description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter (query, sort, filter) having a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Per the rubric, a baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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's function: searching across a Notion workspace for pages, databases, and content. It uses a specific verb ('searches') and resource ('Notion workspace'), and the scope is well-defined. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like listNotionPages and listNotionDatabases, which are listing operations.

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 implies usage when a user needs to search across Notion, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit, which is adequate but not standout.

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