search_current_project

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals the scope constraint and fallback behavior, but does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, or exact fallback semantics. Adequate but could be more detailed.

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?

Three efficient sentences: first defines scope, second gives usage guidance, third notes fallback. Front-loaded with key information, no waste. Perfectly sized.

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?

Moderately complex tool with three parameters and no output schema. Description covers scope and usage guidance but lacks details on return format, pagination, or hybrid search semantics. Missing some contextual completeness for a full picture.

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?

All three parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions; it only implies the query pertains to the current project. Baseline 3 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 it searches only the conversation history for the current project (the git repository/directory). It specifies the scope and distinguishes from broader search tools like search_threads by explicitly limiting to the current project.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this first when the user asks about prior work on the project you're in'. Mentions fallback but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare directly with siblings beyond implication.

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