ts_search

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

The description explains the output (candidates with inputSchema or TypeScript signature) but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or has side effects. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and a mention of non-destructiveness would improve transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and method, then adds usage guidance and output details. No unnecessary words; every sentence 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?

Given six parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main function and optional parameters well. It could mention search threshold or sorting, but the current detail is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100%, but the description adds value by explaining the format parameter's auto-set behavior in code_mode, the aliasing of query/pattern/q, and the default/max for top_k. This goes beyond the schema's raw definitions.

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 clearly states the tool finds top-K Token Savior tools relevant to a natural-language query via embedding cosine similarity. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like search_codebase, memory_search, and corpus_query by focusing specifically on tool discovery.

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 explicitly says to use when the manifest is in 'tiny' or 'code_mode' profile or when unsure which tool fits, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like direct tool invocation.

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