dialog_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by detailing the three search modes (hybrid, semantic, fts) and their underlying mechanisms (RRF, cosine, FTS5). No contradictions.

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 with three sentences. The first sentence clearly states the tool's purpose, and the next two succinctly explain the mode options. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 presence of sibling search tools and the lack of output schema details, the description does not provide enough context for correct tool selection or full understanding. Parameter semantics are incomplete, and return value expectations are not addressed.

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%, so the description must compensate. Only the 'mode' parameter is explained with its options and defaults. The other parameters (k, role, query) are not described beyond their names and types in the schema, leaving their semantics ambiguous.

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 states 'Search ingested Claude Code transcripts', which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'search' or 'search_via_parent', leaving ambiguity about which to use.

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 explains the three modes (hybrid, semantic, fts) but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings or when not to use it. No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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