find_regex

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

No annotations exist. The description does not disclose read-only or destructive nature, nor any side effects. While a search is likely read-only, it is not stated, leaving ambiguity.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the key action and modifier. Efficient and clear.

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 is basic and does not clarify what 'strings' refers to (e.g., program strings, memory). Output schema exists but is not provided; still, context is incomplete for a search tool in IDA.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds 'case-insensitive' context for pattern, but otherwise does not enhance parameter understanding 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 strings with case-insensitive regex patterns, specifying both the action and the type of pattern matching. It distinguishes from sibling tools like find_bytes which search bytes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_text or find. The description only implies regex usage but does not recommend or contrast.

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