search_via_parent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses the tool's blocking nature, signal-based mechanism, fallback to broadcast, and return values (formatted lines or 'timeout'). It does not mention idempotency or side effects, but the read-only nature is implied.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement, mechanism explanation, and parameter list. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is front-loaded and uses simple formatting.

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?

Despite 5 parameters and no annotations or output schema details, the description covers the tool's trigger, blocking behavior, timeout, parameter options, and return format. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: query (required), scope (notes or dialog), mode (hybrid, semantic, fts with scope constraint), k (1-100), and timeout_s. It adds enumeration and defaults not present in the 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 the tool's purpose: 'Delegate a semantic search to the parent process' for children without embeddings. It distinguishes from sibling search tools by specifying the use case for light children with THREADKEEPER_NO_EMBEDDINGS=1.

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 this tool (when child has no embeddings) and explains the delegation mechanism. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools like 'search' or 'dialog_search'.

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