search_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about whether matching is case-sensitive, regex or literal, how results are scoped, or that the operation is read-only. Only the bare action is disclosed.

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 short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though brevity here shades into under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but with zero annotations, zero schema descriptions, and an undocumented printer parameter, the definition leaves too much unresolved for an agent to invoke it confidently against the config-file siblings.

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 nothing defines either parameter. The description's word 'patrón' hints that query is a pattern rather than a literal string, but it never clarifies pattern syntax, and the printer parameter (default 'default') is left entirely unexplained.

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?

States a clear verb+resource: search a pattern across all configs. An agent can distinguish a global search from get_config_file or list_config_files, though those siblings are never named. No sibling differentiation is offered explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: find where a value appears across configs. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to alternatives such as get_config_file for a single file.

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