search_scripts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the search operation and the expected return content (matching lines with script names and line numbers). While it does not explicitly state read-only behavior or error handling, the search verb implies non-destructive behavior and the absence of side effects.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose, search method, and return format. Every word contributes value, with no redundant information or filler.

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 one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: it identifies the resource (RGSS scripts), the search mechanism (regex), and the result format. It does not elaborate on output structure or limitations, but these are minor gaps for a simple search tool.

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 fully describes the single parameter 'pattern' as a regular expression, giving 100% coverage. The description confirms this but adds no additional semantics such as regex flavor, expected format, or examples, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 tool searches RGSS script sources with a regex pattern and returns matching lines with script name and line number. It specifies both the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling search tools that target other entities.

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 its usage—searching scripts by regex—but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like get_scripts or other search tools. No when-not-to-use or version exclusions are provided, leaving the guidance to inference from the tool's name and description.

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