Search Blizzard UI source

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: the first search per flavor downloads a ~200 MB source checkout and may take a minute. This is critical for an agent to manage latency expectations. However, it does not mention caching behavior or any authentication/rate limits, though none are required per context.

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 with no redundant information. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second adds a critical behavioral note. Every word earns its place.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should explain the return format. It does not mention what the results look like (e.g., file paths, line numbers, snippets). The tool has 5 parameters and moderate complexity, so some guidance on output is expected for completeness.

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?

The description adds value beyond the schema by specifying the regex flavor (POSIX ERE) and the download behavior related to the flavor parameter. With 60% schema coverage, the description compensates for some missing parameter details, but it could elaborate more on pathGlob, ignoreCase, and maxResults.

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 performs regex search over Blizzard's UI source code, specifying the regex engine (POSIX ERE) and backend (git grep). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_api or get_wiki_page by targeting source code and positioning it as the best way to learn UI patterns.

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 learning UI patterns but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any when-not-to-use scenarios. While the purpose is clear, guidance on selection among siblings is absent.

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