search_code

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: case-sensitive substring match, support for inline scripts, auto-detection of minified files, context modes (char vs line), max results limit, and return structure. This is comprehensive.

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 concise, with a summary line followed by a structured explanation of parameters and return value. No unnecessary words, and each sentence adds value.

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 description covers all parameters and return value, but lacks details on error conditions or performance bounds. However, given the tool's simplicity, it provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining each parameter in detail, including special formats like 'inline:<index>' and default values. This adds significant meaning 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches for a keyword in loaded scripts, using the verb 'search' and resource 'loaded scripts'. It also mentions it replaces two older tools, distinguishing its purpose.

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 when to use the tool (search keyword in scripts) and how script_url parameter controls scope (all scripts vs. single script). It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to sibling tools, but the replacement statement and parameter details provide clear context.

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