search_code

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

Mentioning 'git grep' gives a behavioral hint that only Git-tracked files may be searched, but this is implicit rather than explicit. The description does not disclose details about case sensitivity, line numbers, output format, or whether untracked files are included, leaving the agent to infer 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?

The description is one short sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical '(git grep)' adds valuable implementation detail without fluff.

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 simple two-parameter search tool, the description covers the essential purpose but omits return value expectations and scope limitations. Without an output schema, the agent must guess whether it receives filenames, matching lines, or other structured results, which is a notable 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?

The schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions (query as regex, pathFilter as glob). The description's mention of regex adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No additional parameter context is provided.

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 code using regex, and identifies the underlying implementation as 'git grep'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like file_search (which likely searches filenames) and search_web, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like file_search or quick_search_replace. It does not mention prerequisites, scope (e.g., repository-wide), or situations where other search tools would be more appropriate.

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