zulip_search

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: results are capped at 10 hits and each snippet is truncated to 200 characters. That is genuinely useful for an agent planning a search. It stops short of 5 because it does not say whether more results can be retrieved (no pagination or broadening hint).

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by the result-shape constraint. Every sentence carries information and there is no filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and result size, which is reasonable. It omits how to obtain results beyond the 10-hit cap and what 'the stream' refers to, leaving gaps an agent would hit on a second query.

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 says nothing about query syntax, operators, or scoping. It does imply that the single 'query' parameter is a full-text search string, which is the minimum needed for a self-evidently named parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Full-text search across every topic in the stream.' This clearly separates it from read-oriented siblings like zulip_read and zulip_topics, though the phrase 'the stream' is undefined and leaves the scope slightly ambiguous.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative. Usage is only implied by 'full-text search' versus browsing topics with zulip_topics or reading with zulip_read.

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