Search VBA

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it discloses the return shape (module, line number, line content) and the default plain-text vs regex mode, which helps the agent anticipate results.

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?

Three sentences with no filler or repetition. The first sentence front-loads the core behavior and output; the second gives the usage scenario; the third covers the mode toggle. Every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema covers return values, annotations cover side-effect safety, and the description covers when to use the tool and the key behavioral modes. The only potential concern, result limits, is documented in the schema via max_results. Nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful param context by specifying that is_regex uses a 'Python regular expression' and by framing query as a symbol lookup for refactoring, which goes slightly beyond the bare schema descriptions.

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 states a specific action ('searches every module's source'), the target resource ('an Office file'), and the concrete return content (module, line number, and line itself). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling module-read tools like xlide_read_module by emphasizing the across-modules search scope.

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 gives an explicit use case: 'find where a name is declared or used before changing it.' It does not list exclusions or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when this search tool is appropriate.

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