nexo_diary_archive_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only search operation on a permanent archive, with no side effects. However, it does not disclose potential rate limits, error handling, or real-time consistency, though these are minor for such a tool.

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 three concise sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides context, and the third gives usage examples. No superfluous information and well-structured.

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 tool's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description is largely complete. It explains what data is searched and when to use it. However, it lacks details about return format or pagination, but since there is no output schema, this is a minor gap.

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 100% and each parameter is well-described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as interaction details or format requirements. The baseline of 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 tool searches the permanent diary archive (subconscious memory), distinguishing it from active diary tools. It explains the archive's origin (diaries older than 180 days) and provides concrete usage examples like 'last year' and 'months ago'.

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?

The description explicitly guides the agent to use this tool for historical lookups, implying it is not for recent entries. It gives example queries, but does not name alternative tools like nexo_session_diary_read, which would strengthen guidance.

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