find_commits

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

No annotations present, so description must cover behavioral traits. It states it searches read-only, but omits details like result order, pagination behavior, or performance implications. The description adds limited behavioral context beyond the search intent.

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 sentences with front-loaded purpose. Efficient but not overly terse; the example adds clarity without wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., list of commits, formatting). Also lacks details on defaults like limit and max_chars. Given 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context on results and constraints.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the query parameter can be message substring, hash, or branch name, and hints that session_id is optional for scoping. This clarifies usage beyond the schema definitions.

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 git commits across sessions by message, hash prefix, or branch name. The verb 'search' and resource 'commits' are specific, and the scope 'across all sessions' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_session_commits.

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?

Provides a concrete example of when to use ('find that commit where we fixed the parser'), but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or mention of alternative sibling tools like get_session_commits or search.

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