Opencode Investigate

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the burden of revealing behavior. It explicitly discloses the GET /find and GET /file/content call chain and the max_files limit, indicating a read-only operation. It does not discuss rate limits or edge cases, but the core behavior is transparent for a simple search tool.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the endpoint chain is presented succinctly in the second sentence.

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 tool is simple with only two parameters and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the core operation, the endpoint chain, and the max_files behavior adequately, though examples or query format hints would make it complete.

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%, so the description is expected to explain parameters. It does clarify that max_files limits the number of results, but query is only implied by the phrase 'Search project files' and not given explicit semantics such as search syntax or scope. This is partial compensation for the low schema coverage.

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 that the tool searches project files and returns matching results, which is a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the focus on file search is distinct from the agent and configuration siblings listed.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever you need to search project files and retrieve matching file contents. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but none of the sibling tools appear to perform a similar file-search function.

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