search_sessions_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose key behavior: results are paragraph-level summaries rather than granular events, and an empty result should trigger a follow-up call to search_events_tool. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or result limits/pagination, so a small gap remains.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does, then lists use cases and exclusions in compact lines with no filler. Every sentence adds routing or expectation-setting value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, yet the description still conveys the semantic nature of results. Combined with explicit sibling routing and fallback behavior, an agent has everything needed to invoke this 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?

The single 'question' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. The examples of question types ('what-did-I-work-on', project topics, task recaps) give indirect guidance on how to phrase the input, but no explicit statement about the expected format or length, so compensation is partial.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search session summaries in the activity database') and immediately distinguishes the scope from siblings by noting it returns paragraph summaries, not granular event detail. An agent can tell it apart from search_events_tool without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly enumerates when to use it (broad time windows, daily/weekly overviews, recap questions), when not to (exact date ranges → list_sessions_tool or search_bounded_tool), and gives a concrete fallback path if results are empty (search_events_tool). Nothing is left to inference.

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