file_search
Search for a keyword across project files using optional file patterns and line limits.
Instructions
在项目文件中搜索内容
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| glob | No | 文件匹配模式 | **/* |
| lines | No | ||
| keyword | Yes |
Search for a keyword across project files using optional file patterns and line limits.
在项目文件中搜索内容
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| glob | No | 文件匹配模式 | **/* |
| lines | No | ||
| keyword | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral details but only says 'search content', omitting any specifics about case sensitivity, search scope, or limitations.
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?
Single clear sentence, highly concise. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail.
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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete, failing to explain how glob patterns or line counts work.
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 33% (glob has description), and the tool description adds no information about parameters keyword or lines.
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 '在项目文件中搜索内容' (Search content in project files) clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like file_read or file_list.
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 to use this tool versus alternatives, such as log_search or command_exec. No preconditions or contexts provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/GT-dinuo/server-ops-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server