Find memory by file

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses search scope (all projects or specified), matching criteria (via 'files' field for issues, AGENTS.md bullets for decisions/learnings). Could mention it's read-only, but intent is clear.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. Action and context are front-loaded. Every sentence adds essential information.

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?

Explains input parameters and output types (issues, decisions/learnings). No output schema, but description covers what is returned. Could mention pagination or limits, but not critical for a search 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 covers 50% (file param described). Description adds value for project param by stating default behavior ('searches all projects unless one is given') and clarifies file param usage with examples. Compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns issues and decisions/learnings that touch a given file, answering 'why is this code the way it is?'. It distinguishes from siblings like search_memory or log_issue.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when you land on confusing code and want the history behind it') and mentions scope ('searches all projects unless one is given'). Does not explicitly list alternatives among siblings.

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