code_search_workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully reveals two traits: the required UI state and that results populate asynchronously via VS Code's own search rather than being returned directly. It does not say whether/how the agent retrieves those results, what happens if the view is not open, or any error behavior.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the purpose leads and the prerequisite follows immediately. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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 one-parameter UI-automation tool with no output schema, the definition covers the required prior state and the asynchronous result behavior, which is the core need. It still leaves the agent unsure how results become available to it and what failure looks like, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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% for the single 'query' parameter, so the schema already defines it as 'Text to search the workspace for.' The description adds only the target location (the workspace search box), which is marginal beyond the schema.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource: type a query into the workspace search box, which maps unambiguously to code_search_workspace. It distinguishes itself from the adjacent code_show_search by framing that sibling as a prerequisite rather than a duplicate, though it never explicitly says 'this is not show_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?

Gives an explicit precondition: the Search view must already be open, and names the sibling to call first (show_search). That is genuine when-to-use guidance, but there are no stated exclusions or alternative search paths (e.g. explorer-based search) to choose between.

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