grep_object_store

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns matches with surrounding context (similar to grep) and explains each parameter's role. It does not mention side effects, authentication, or rate limits, but the behavior is clearly described as a read-only pattern search with optional context.

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, starting with the main purpose and then listing parameters. It is front-loaded and each sentence adds value. The parameter list is slightly redundant with the schema but aids readability.

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 (4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains input format, optional parameters, and return value (matches with context or no-matches message). No gaps are apparent.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful explanations for each parameter: 'object_id' format (@obj_001), 'pattern' as regex, 'path' as navigation to nested attribute, and 'case_sensitive' default. This significantly enhances the schema's minimal 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's purpose: searching for a regex pattern in a string stored in the object store. It uses a specific verb ('search for') and resource ('string stored in the object store'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_from_object_store' and 'sed_object_store' by mentioning 'regex pattern' and 'similar to grep'.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (search for patterns in object store strings) and includes optional parameters (path, case_sensitive) that guide usage. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but the provided context (e.g., 'similar to grep') implies appropriate use cases.

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