search_analyzers

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

Despite readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds that compilation tools transmit source/virtual files to the Compiler Explorer backend (privacy/behavior) and warns that assembly differences are not performance measurements, providing caution beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 first sentence is clear and front-loaded, but the second and third sentences are tangential and somewhat ambiguous, adding notes about compilation tools and performance measurements that may not be necessary for a search tool; still the description is short.

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 tool is a simple search with output schema and annotations. Description covers the core purpose and provides important caveats (backend transmission, performance caveat), but omits detail on the compiler checking mechanism and pagination parameters, making it mostly complete but with residual gaps.

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 0%; the description mentions 'optionally checking one compiler' (compiler param) and implies query by talking about discovering IDs, but does not explain query matching semantics or the limit/offset pagination parameters, leaving them to inference.

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 uses a specific verb 'Discover' and enumerates the exact analyzer families (clang-tidy, IWYU, llvm-mca, OSACA, PVS-Studio) along with 'IDs and recognized aliases,' and clarifies it can optionally check a compiler. This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like search_compilers and search_libraries.

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 implies usage for finding supported analyzer IDs/aliases and mentions optional compiler checking, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when to prefer this over search_compilers/search_libraries. The context of the tool's name and parameter 'compiler' gives clear usage context.

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