Search Blizzard's UI source code

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full transparency burden. It conveys a read-only search over a large fixed corpus and adds 'ground truth' context, but it does not disclose output format, default flavor/limit behavior, or performance implications.

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: the first front-loads the action and scope, the second provides valuable usage context. No words are wasted.

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?

Despite 8 parameters and no output schema, the description clearly covers the tool's purpose, scope, and primary use case. It relies on the schema for filters and limits, though it does not describe the return structure or mention TOC files, leaving a minor gap.

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 75%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond reinforcing that this is a regex search, so the baseline score is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Regex-search the full Lua and XML source of the 348 Blizzard addons that ship with the client.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like wow_api_search or wow_ui_read_file by emphasizing full-source ground-truth searching.

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?

'Use it when the API reference tells you what a function is but not how it is meant to be used' gives a clear trigger and context. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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