Search past conversations

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses search scope and returns snippets, but does not mention pagination, ordering, case-sensitivity, or performance characteristics. Adequate but lacks some behavioral details a read-only search tool should disclose.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with action, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and 3 params, description covers search scope, return type (snippets), and links to get_conversation. Missing details like default limit, source enumeration reference, and potential pagination, but overall adequate.

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 coverage is 67% (query described, source limited enum in description). Description adds context that query searches across titles, bodies, and results, but does not explain limit's default or behavior. Adds some value but not full compensation for missing parameter descriptions.

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?

Clearly states full-text search across conversations including titles, message bodies, and tool results/args. Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_conversation (loads one) and list_conversations (likely lists without search).

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?

Explicitly says to use this tool to search and then load with get_conversation. Implies not for loading full content, but does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like list_conversations.

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