solucortex_search

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it is ad-hoc rather than context-building, uses OpenAI embeddings, and carries a 20 req/min rate limit. This gives the agent operational expectations that the annotations do not.

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 short sentences deliver purpose, usage guidance, sibling differentiation, an example, and a rate limit with no waste. The most important information is front-loaded before the longer guidance.

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?

The description covers when to use the tool, how it differs from the main sibling, and an operational constraint. Combined with full schema descriptions, annotations, and an output schema, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description reinforces that the query is a question or topic and that this is semantic search, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter-semantics burden.

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 a specific action and resource: "Ad-hoc semantic search of memories" with the exact endpoint POST /search/semantic. It distinguishes the tool from recall by noting that recall "builds the full startup context," so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: "Use for specific questions during a task" and gives a concrete example. It also names the closest alternative, solucortex_recall, and explains the distinction, which is clear routing guidance.

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