Search Content

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: it discloses the return format (matching lines with file path, 1-indexed line number, 0-indexed column offset) and highlights grep-style semantics. It does not mention pagination or snapshot behavior, but those are documented in the schema's cursor parameter, so the extra context is sufficient.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: the first states the core function, the second describes the output format, the third explains scoping, the fourth covers hidden files, and the fifth routes to the correct sibling. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant fluff.

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 rich input schema (100% coverage across all 10 parameters) and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately fills the remaining gap by specifying the return format. It also covers the key searching behaviors (regex/literal, hidden files, glob scoping) and points to the alternative for filename search. An agent has enough to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the meaning of 'pattern' with an example and explains includeHidden's effect, but it largely repeats what the schema already provides. It adds value for output semantics rather than parameter semantics, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Search file contents'), states the method (text or regex, grep-style), and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling find_files ('search by filename instead'). An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and how it differs from nearby tools without inspecting the schema.

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?

It explicitly names the alternative tool (find_files) and the exact condition that selects it (searching by filename instead of content). It also gives practical usage tips such as scoping with a glob pattern and enabling includeHidden for dotfiles, giving the agent clear guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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