nexus_search

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only and idempotent, so the description adds the behavioral trait of being 'gitignore-aware' and the ability to search via literal, regex, or glob. However, it does not disclose output format, default limit behavior, or potential errors, making it minimally sufficient beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that pack the key information—search modes and gitignore-aware behavior—with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

While the description provides the essential purpose and search modes, it omits details about the return value (e.g., file paths, snippets, match counts) and how the limit parameter behaves. Given the simple nature of the tool and the existence of annotations, this is adequate but has clear gaps in expected output.

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 schema already documents 'pattern' and 'glob', but the description introduces the concept of 'literal' search, which is not present in the schema, thereby enriching parameter understanding. The 'limit' parameter remains undocumented both in schema and description, slightly reducing the score.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('files'), and clearly distinguishes the two search modes: content (regex/literal) and glob patterns. It also sets it apart from sibling tools like nexus_find_symbols or nexus_references by focusing on file content rather than code symbols or references.

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 explains what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. Sibling tools like nexus_find_symbols or nexus_memory_search exist for other search types, but the description does not mention them or provide exclusion criteria, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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