bitrix24_im_chat_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It correctly indicates a non-destructive search operation but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior on no results. The description is adequate but minimally informative beyond the schema.

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 sentences, no extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose, front-loading the core functionality and use case. Ideal 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?

For a simple search tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does (search), how to use it (by name/title), and when (finding specific chats). Minor missing details (e.g., case sensitivity, exact match) prevent a perfect score, but it is largely 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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single 'query' parameter. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema's description ('Search query (chat name or partial match)'), so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'IM chats', specifying that it searches by name/title. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bitrix24_im_chat_list by focusing on search functionality, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, mentioning 'workgroup chats, project chats, or specific conversations'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or directly contrast with alternatives like bitrix24_im_chat_list, though the context is sufficient for most agents.

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