githubSearchCode

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond annotations, including strict prefix matching for 'path', pagination parameters, match type behavior, and filtering constraints.

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 long but well-structured with clear sections (<when>, <fromTool>, <toTool>, <gotchas>, <examples>). It is front-loaded with essential usage context, though some redundancy exists (e.g., repeating 'match' behavior in multiple places).

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?

Given the tool's complexity with nested queries and multiple parameters, the description is remarkably complete. It covers when to use, how to chain with other tools, gotchas, and examples. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values.

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?

Input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, and schema coverage is 100%. The description enriches parameter understanding with contextual advice like 'Start lean: single filter -> verify -> add filters' and explicit examples, adding 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 that the tool searches GitHub code, with explicit directives to 'Find code patterns' and 'Locate files by path'. It distinguishes between match=file and match=path, and mentions cross-repo usage. Sibling tools like githubSearchRepositories and githubGetFileContent are differentiated through usage guidance.

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 <when> section defines appropriate contexts, and <fromTool> and <toTool> sections provide explicit sequencing with sibling tools. The <gotchas> section offers critical do's and don'ts, such as avoiding combining extension+filename+path and preferring owner+repo for precision.

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