Search collected scripts

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the search modes (literal or regex) which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention read-only status, default behavior like case sensitivity, or result limits, which limits transparency.

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 a single sentence, direct and front-loaded. It includes the essential purpose and method without any filler, making it highly concise.

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 five parameters and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It lacks details about return format, what collectionId refers to, how maxResults behaves, and other essential usage semantics needed for an agent to reliably invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description explains query and regex via 'by literal text or regular expression' but does not clarify collectionId, maxResults, or caseSensitive. With five parameters and no schema descriptions, this is an insufficient compensation.

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 'Search script sources already collected in this MCP process by literal text or regular expression.' This clearly identifies the action (search), resource (script sources already collected), and method (literal/regex). It distinguishes from sibling collect_code by emphasizing already collected scripts.

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 implies usage after scripts have been collected in this MCP process, giving clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. No explicit 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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