search_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only search and hints at pagination via next_before_event_id, but does not disclose permissions, result format, limit behavior, or search semantics such as case sensitivity.

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 short and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, the second sentence is cryptic and under-specified, making the overall structure less helpful than its brevity suggests.

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 four-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It gives the basic purpose and a pagination hint but omits parameter meanings, return behavior, and usage context relative to siblings.

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% for four parameters, and the description does not compensate. It vaguely maps query to literal text and references next_before_event_id, which is not even a parameter name (the schema has before_event_id), while project_id, limit, and before_event_id remain unexplained.

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 verb and resource: "Search literal text in summaries, details and files." This makes the tool's core purpose clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_context or other siblings, and no exclusions are stated. "Follow next_before_event_id" is a pagination hint rather than usage guidance.

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