pscribe_grep

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention the output format ('Returns matching lines with session ID prefix') and the --count option, but it fails to disclose the important default filter (status=confirmed) that significantly affects results. This is a notable gap.

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 appropriately sized: four sentences, each earning its place. It front-loads the core purpose, adds a practical usage example, mentions the output format, and briefly notes the count flag. No unnecessary words 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?

Given the tool has 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is relatively thin. It covers the main use case and output format but omits crucial context like the default status filter and does not explain how context parameters work. It is adequate but has clear gaps for such a complex 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it references --count but does not expand on any other parameter. It does not compensate for gaps because there are none, but it also adds little value.

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 for patterns across transcript sessions.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by focusing on searching rather than starting/stopping/tailing sessions. The concrete usage examples ('did anyone mention deployment last week?') further clarify its purpose.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool ('Use this for queries like...'), but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools. It provides no exclusions, but the guidance is strong enough for a 4.

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