Search GitLab projects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'accessible' scope, which implies visibility/authorization constraints, but does not mention pagination or other behavioral details. Given the annotations, the added context is adequate but minimal.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows with the primary use case, making efficient use of the allowed space.

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 output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description adequately positions the tool for its disambiguation role. Despite having 10 optional parameters with no schema descriptions, the essential guidance (what is searched, when to use it) is present, though deeper filter semantics are left to the agent to infer.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the 'search' parameter matches against name, path, or description, which is useful. However, the other 9 parameters (sort, order_by, visibility, etc.) remain unexplained, leaving a significant gap partially addressed.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('GitLab projects') with explicit searchable fields ('name, path, or description'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_project (single project by ID) and list_group_projects (projects within a group).

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 recommends using this tool to resolve an ambiguous project before other calls, providing clear context for when it should be used. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the guidance is practical and actionable.

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