search_summaries

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains extraction options and search mode, adding behavioral context beyond the schema, but omits safety aspects like read-only or permissions. No contradiction with annotations (none exist).

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 front-loads the purpose and includes a detailed list of parameters with explanations. While somewhat lengthy, it is well-structured as a docstring and each part serves a purpose.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, parameters, and extraction options thoroughly. It does not need to detail output schema since one is provided, and it includes search mode and filter context.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description explains each parameter thoroughly: query, extract with enum values, limit, domain, importance, thinking_stage, source, and mode with defaults. This adds significant meaning beyond the minimal schema.

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 'Search conversation summaries with hybrid vector + keyword search', specifying both the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_conversations' and 'semantic_search' by mentioning hybrid 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?

The description implies usage for searching summaries but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks comparisons or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context.

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