voicememos_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden: it discloses case-insensitivity, regex mode, snippet returns, and inclusive date-bound semantics. It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether results are ranked or truncated beyond 'limit', or any cost/rate considerations.

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 behavior sentence is front-loaded and the per-argument list is terse with no redundancy. Every line maps to a distinct parameter or behavior.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers inputs and the return shape ('snippets per memo'). Minor gaps remain around result ordering, pagination/offset behavior, and whether the date filters apply to recording or transcription time.

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%, so the description has to compensate and largely does: every one of the 5 parameters is explained, with explicit YYYY-MM-DD formats for since/until and the interaction between query and regex. Only limit's default (20 in schema, absent from description) is left implicit.

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 opening sentence gives a concrete verb and resource ('Search transcripts and titles'), adds the case-insensitive trait, and says what comes back ('snippets per memo'). It doesn't distinguish itself from siblings like voicememos_list or voicememos_read, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

Search-by-text usage is implied by the tool name, field targets, and regex option, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to voicememos_list for unfiltered enumeration. An agent could plausibly pick list over search for a keyword lookup.

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