phabricator_diff_search

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful domain context that diffs are snapshots and a revision can have multiple, but it does not describe pagination behavior, result format, permission needs, or rate-limit context. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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 short sentences are front-loaded with the core action and resource, and the second sentence efficiently clarifies the diff/revision relationship. There is no filler or repetition.

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, full schema coverage, and readOnly annotation provide enough information to invoke the tool correctly. However, it omits guidance on choosing this search over revision or raw-diff siblings and gives little operational context beyond the domain definition. Since there is no output schema, not explaining return values is acceptable, but usage context remains thin.

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 100%, and every parameter, including constraints, pagination cursors, order, queryKey, and attachments, is documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb, 'Search', and resource, 'Differential diffs', and clarifies that diffs are code change snapshots within a revision with multiple diffs possible per revision. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like phabricator_revision_search or phabricator_diff_raw, so sibling differentiation is implied rather than named.

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 no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. The only contextual clue is that a revision may have multiple diffs, leaving the agent to infer usage from the resource name.

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