opencode_session_search

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 reveals only that matching is limited to titles, but says nothing about case sensitivity, substring vs whole-word matching, result ordering, pagination, or empty-result behavior for a read/search 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient rather than padded, though the extreme brevity is part of why other dimensions are thin.

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 annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description should do more work. It omits result shape, ordering, and the interaction of 'directory' scoping with search, so an agent cannot predict behavior beyond 'some title matches are returned'.

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 50%: the 'directory' param is documented in the schema, while 'query' is bare. The description partially compensates by clarifying that the query string matches title keywords, but adds no format, multi-word, or quoting semantics.

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 (search) plus resource (sessions) and narrows the match scope to keywords in the title. That scope detail distinguishes it from opencode_session_list (enumerate) and opencode_session_get (fetch by id), though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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 guidance on when this is preferable to opencode_session_list or opencode_session_get, and no stated prerequisites. The title-only matching is implied as the use case but never framed as a decision rule against alternatives.

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