search_bookmarks_extended

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the search scope and parameter ranges but lacks details on ordering, pagination, side effects, or read-only behavior.

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 a clear purpose statement, an Args block, and a practical note. No extraneous information.

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 search tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter details, and a usage tip. It lacks output format or error handling, but is fairly 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by clarifying that 'query' matches against titles, notes, and tags, and specifies valid ranges for 'days_back' and 'limit'. This goes beyond the schema's default and type information.

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 'Extended search for comprehensive historical results across titles, notes, and tags.' This clearly identifies the tool as a comprehensive search variant, distinguishing it from simpler siblings like 'search_bookmarks'.

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 guidance to use tag-based searches for efficiency and mentions being mindful of server load. However, it does not explicitly compare with 'search_bookmarks' or state when not to use this tool.

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