grep_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'single file' and 'matching lines with numbers', but omits details like handling of binary files, memory usage, file size implications, or that it reads the entire file. With no annotations, this is insufficient for safe inference.

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 a single sentence, efficiently front-loaded with essential action, but for a 5-parameter tool it is too brief. It sacrifices informativeness for conciseness.

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 5 parameters with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain how to use the parameters or what the output format is beyond 'lines with numbers', despite an output schema existing. The description fails to compensate for lack of structured documentation.

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 provides no explanation of parameters beyond their titles. It fails to clarify that 'path' is the file path, 'pattern' is a regex, 'context' lines around matches, 'max_matches' limit, or 'ignore_case' behavior. The description adds no semantic value.

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 verb 'Regex-search', the resource 'a single file', and the output 'matching lines with numbers'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_directory_tree or find_processes which do not perform regex file search.

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 use for regex searches on a single file, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives. No sibling grep tools exist, but the description could include contexts like 'when you need to find matching lines in a specific file.

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