Godot Project Search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. The description states only the core action (search) but doesn't disclose whether the search is case-sensitive, recursive, whether it covers binary files, or what the return format looks like. For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded. No wasted words. However, while brevity is good, this borders on under-specification rather than genuine conciseness, given how much critical detail is absent.

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?

For a tool with 2 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. A search tool should disclose behavior around case sensitivity, recursion depth, file type coverage, result pagination via maxMatches, and error conditions. None of this is present, making the tool risky 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds virtually nothing about the two parameters (query, maxMatches). No information about query format, whether maxMatches is optional, its default behavior, or its upper/lower bounds. With 2 undocumented parameters and zero description coverage, the description must compensate but does not.

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 'Search project files for plain text' clearly states a verb+resource with scope (project files, plain text). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like godot_project_grep or godot_file_read which overlap in search/read functionality. The purpose is concrete but the distinction from siblings is unclear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like godot_project_grep (which likely handles regex/grep-style searches). No exclusions, prerequisites, or context provided. The agent has no way to decide between this and sibling search tools.

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