search_sms

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

With no annotations, description must disclose behavior. It states 'semantic search' and describes output fields, implying read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly mention side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or pagination details beyond the limit parameter.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences for purpose/returns, then a brief but clear argument list. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and basic return fields. Output schema exists, so full structure explanation is unnecessary. Missing details like ordering or metadata, but sufficient for a search tool.

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 description fully compensates by explaining all three parameters: query ('searches message content'), phone_number_id ('Scope search to a specific phone number'), and limit ('Max results, 1-100'). Adds significant value beyond 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?

Clearly states it performs 'Semantic search across SMS messages,' specifying a distinct action and resource. Differentiates from siblings like 'search_threads' (for email) and 'list_sms_conversations' (listing, not searching).

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?

Implied use for searching SMS content, but no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparisons with alternatives like 'list_sms_conversations' or 'get_sms_thread'. Lacks guidance on choosing between search and list operations.

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