mcquest_find_evidence

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It explicitly labels the tool as 'READ ONLY' and explains that results are grouped into code and documentation evidence. It does not go into rate limits, authentication, or caveats, but the main behavioral traits relevant to an agent are 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?

The description is compact, front-loads the critical READ ONLY label, and each sentence adds a useful piece of information: combined search scope, grouped output, valid scopes, optional phase filter, and when to prefer this tool. No wasted wording.

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?

The output schema is available, so return-value details need not be repeated. The description covers the essential usage context, result grouping, scope values, phase filtering, and read-only behavior. It only lacks a clearer explanation of how 'path' and 'docs_path' relate to the different evidence categories, but this is not a major gap given the defaults in the schema.

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 supply meaning beyond the parameter names. It does explain 'scope' and the optional 'phase' filter, but it leaves 'path', 'docs_path', 'max_results', and 'context_lines' without any descriptive addition, relying on their default values in the schema.

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 clear verb-resource relationship: 'Search across code, documentation, and phase evidence in a single call.' It also specifies the result grouping ('CODE EVIDENCE and DOCUMENTATION EVIDENCE'), which distinguishes it from generic search siblings like mcquest_search and mcquest_search_docs.

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 final sentence gives explicit guidance: 'Use this instead of separately searching code and docs.' This effectively tells an agent when the combined tool is appropriate, although it does not explicitly name sibling tools or state exclusions such as 'use mcquest_read_file when you need exact file contents.'

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