boj_github_search_code

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers no information about how the search works, what permissions are required, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what the response contains. 'Search code on GitHub' is a minimal statement that doesn't describe any behavioral traits beyond the basic action implied by the name.

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 extremely concise at just three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the essential action and target, making it immediately scannable and efficient.

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 complexity of a search operation, no annotations, no output schema, and poor parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or provide any context about GitHub's code search capabilities, leaving significant gaps for an agent trying to use this tool effectively.

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?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema provides no documentation about the 'query' parameter. The description doesn't compensate by explaining what the query parameter should contain (e.g., search syntax, supported operators, examples), leaving the parameter's semantics completely undocumented.

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 'Search code on GitHub' clearly states the action (search) and target resource (code on GitHub), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'boj_github_search_issues', which performs a similar search operation but for issues rather than code.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple GitHub-related sibling tools (e.g., 'boj_github_search_issues', 'boj_github_get_file', 'boj_github_list_repos') that serve different purposes, but the description doesn't indicate when this code search tool is appropriate versus those other options.

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