ghl_conversation_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the HTTP method (GET), OAuth scopes, and pagination parameters, which are consistent. However, it does not elaborate on other behavioral aspects such as rate limits, error handling, or result format, beyond what annotations already indicate.

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 concise, with four sentences covering purpose, endpoint, scopes, and pagination. It is front-loaded with the main action. The inclusion of technical details like the version header and source file may be slightly extraneous but does not detract significantly.

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?

The description explains the tool's capability to search with filters and pagination, but given the lack of an output schema, it does not describe the return structure. The schema has 21 parameters with many enums, so more context on the response and how results are organized would improve completeness.

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 100%, and the description does not repeat or add meaningful extra meaning for parameters beyond the schema. The mention of pagination exists in the description but adds no detail beyond what the 'limit' parameter already provides. 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 conversations and returns matching results with sorting and filtering. The verb 'Search' and resource 'Conversations' are explicit, and it distinguishes from sibling conversation tools that perform other operations like create, get, or update.

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 implies usage for searching conversations with filters but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion criteria or mention of when not to use it is given, which limits clarity for an AI agent deciding among many conversation-related tools.

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