Search Messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Searches' is consistent. However, it adds only the filtering context (text and time) without discussing pagination, cross-space behavior, or any side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence of 14 words. Every word is essential; no fluff or redundancy.

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 the presence of an output schema and high schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate but lacks mention of search scope (e.g., all spaces vs. specific) or how the 'max_spaces' parameter affects behavior. Could be more complete 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 83%, so the input schema already documents most parameters clearly. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'Searches', the resource 'messages in Google Chat spaces', and the criteria 'by text content and/or time range'. It differentiates from siblings like 'get_messages' (retrieval by ID) and 'search_gmail_messages' (Gmail). No ambiguity.

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?

While the description indicates the tool is for searching messages in Google Chat, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_messages', 'search_gmail_messages'). There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios to avoid.

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