chatlog_search

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

With no annotations, the description reveals the behavioral change based on query emptiness and mentions FTS5. But it omits other aspects like pagination, sorting, permissions, or output format, leaving gaps.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the core behavior. Every word contributes value, though more detail could be added without becoming verbose.

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?

Given 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return format, defaults beyond the schema, or how to use parameters like since/until or search_mode.

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% and the description only addresses the query parameter's effect. The other 11 parameters (k, since, until, timeout, agent_id, etc.) are not explained, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it searches chat_log rows and distinguishes behavior based on query emptiness (FTS5 keyword vs. filter-only). This is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like files_search or memory_search by resource type.

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 describes two modes (keyword vs. filter-only) based on query, giving context on when to use each. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or comparisons to alternatives like other search tools.

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