Search by Tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating safety. The description adds valuable behavioral details: detection from inline #hashtags and YAML frontmatter, nested sub-tag matching, and optional content previews. 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with core functionality, no waste. Perfectly concise for the complexity.

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, read-only, filtered list tool with well-documented schema and annotations, the description suffices. No output schema needed; return behavior is explained ('matching note paths with optional content previews').

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage and documentation for all 3 parameters. The description adds marginal value by reiterating the # prefix and nested tag behavior, but mostly duplicates schema info. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 finds notes tagged with a specific tag, including nested sub-tags. It specifies the resource (notes) and action (search by tag) with precision, distinguishing it from siblings like search_by_frontmatter and search_notes.

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?

It provides clear usage context: 'Use to collect notes belonging to a topic, area, or workflow stage.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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