bus_search

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the search scope and filters, but does not confirm whether the operation is read-only, describe the return format, or discuss any side effects or permissions. This is a moderate disclosure for a search tool.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It is concise, with no redundant words or filler, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

The description covers the core search functionality and major parameters, but it does not indicate the return value or output structure, and there is no output schema to compensate. Given the tool has 5 parameters and no annotations, additional context about results and expected behavior would make it more complete.

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 description semantically maps 'text' to query, 'sender' to from_sender, 'tag' to tags, and 'archives' to include_archives, substantially adding meaning to the schema which has 0% description coverage. The 'limit' parameter is not mentioned, but its purpose is reasonably inferable.

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 the room and optionally its archives, filtering by text, sender, or tag. This specific verb and resource, along with the filter options, distinguishes it from sibling tools like bus_send, bus_read, and bus_history.

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 gives clear context that this tool is for searching, as opposed to sending, reading, or managing the room. It mentions optional archives and filter types, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name when not to use it.

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