search_code_advanced

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto-selection of tools, regex requirement, and fuzzy limitation to ugrep. However, it omits details about pagination behavior across backends, error handling, and potential consequences of auto-selection failures. The mention of 'may require an external search tool' is vague.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loading the main purpose. It avoids redundancy but has minor duplication (ugrep only mentioned twice). Overall efficient communication.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and existing output schema, the description covers key behaviors and parameter highlights but lacks details on default values, error states, and return format. Adequate for basic use but not fully 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 description must compensate. It adds meaning for pattern, file_pattern, regex, fuzzy, and pagination parameters, but does not explain case_sensitive, context_lines, or the exact syntax of pattern. Coverage is partial, not full.

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 it searches for code patterns with pagination and auto-selects the best search tool, distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_files which searches by file name. The mention of glob, regex, and fuzzy matching further clarifies 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?

The description implies usage for code pattern searches and lists supported features, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to prefer find_files or when not to use it. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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