semantic_search

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

With no annotations, the description only mentions 'AI-powered' and '384-dim vector embeddings', but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, performance implications, or how similarity_threshold affects results. The description is too brief for a complex semantic search.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with key information. However, it could be slightly more structured but remains effective.

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, the description lacks information about return format or pagination. With 6 parameters and many sibling search tools, more context about scope and expected results would improve completeness.

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 83% (5 of 6 parameters described). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not compensate for the undocumented 'importance_level' enum. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it performs semantic search on messages using vector embeddings, distinguishing it from keyword-based searches. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar semantic tools like 'find_similar_messages' among siblings.

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 versus alternatives like 'search_messages' or 'find_similar_messages'. The description does not provide usage context or exclusions.

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