Search GitLab

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that availability depends on GitLab tier and search configuration, which is useful but does not elaborate on other behaviors like result structure or pagination.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, with no redundant details. Every sentence adds value.

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 16 parameters and minimal schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't clarify default behavior, pagination, or scope-specific nuances. Although an output schema exists, the high parameter count and low coverage necessitate more guidance, which is absent.

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 only 13% (only group and project have descriptions). The description lists scope values already present in the enum but does not explain other params like page, sort, regex, search_type, or confidential. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the tool searches globally, within a group, or within a project, and enumerates supported scopes. This verb+resource description distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_projects and search_code by covering a broad multi-scope search capability.

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 contexts (global, group, project) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as search_projects or search_code. It notes availability depends on GitLab tier and configuration, but lacks clear exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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