Buscar dentro de arquivos (grep)

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

With no annotations to lean on, the description surfaces non-obvious behaviors: ignored directories (.git/node_modules/dist), no symlink traversal, binary skipping, and the file:line:snippet output format. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a grep-like search.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the purpose and packs exclusions and output format into the second clause without redundancy. Every word 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?

For a read-only search with no output schema, the description provides the return format and important scope limits. It lacks an explicit comparison to search_files and a mention of the max-result cap, but the schema supplies defaults and the core invocation is fully specified.

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 only 40%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. The only param-related clarification is 'texto/regex' (query/is_regex); max, ignore_case, and path receive no added meaning, and path is already covered by the schema. The description does not fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a precise verb and object ('Procura texto/regex dentro dos arquivos do workspace') and completes it with the return shape 'arquivo:linha: trecho'. The title '(grep)' reinforces content search, making it easy to distinguish from the sibling search_files.

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?

It clearly establishes when to use the tool: whenever file contents need to be searched with literal text or regex. It does not give explicit exclusions or name an alternative like search_files, so it misses the top tier, but the context is unambiguous.

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