ue5_search_source

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It clearly states that the operation is a search, is non-mutating, and defines the return contents: file path, line number, and surrounding context. It does not cover regex flavor or edge cases, but it gives a solid behavioral contract for a read-only search tool.

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 tightly written sentence that leads with the primary action and resource, then states the return value. Every phrase earns its place and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

The combination of the description and the fully documented schema provides enough information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly: what is searched, what is returned, and how parameters constrain results. With no output schema, the description adequately covers the return contract, though it could mention path formatting or failure behavior for full 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines all parameters. The description adds some alignment by mentioning regex, C++/header files, and surrounding context, but it does not materially go beyond what the parameter descriptions already state.

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 action ('Search'), the target resource ('C++ and header files in the UE5 project Source directory'), and the method ('using a regex pattern'). It is specific enough to distinguish the tool from read/execute siblings, though it does not explicitly name or contrast any alternative tool.

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 the appropriate use case: finding code matches by regex in the Source directory. However, it provides no explicit condition for when to choose this tool over siblings like ue5_read_file or ue5_read_log, nor does it state when not to use it.

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