search_by_linecount

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this is a search/retrieval operation, but it does not describe the output format, whether all matches are returned, or behavior for no results. It adds little beyond the tool name itself.

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 a single, succinct sentence that front-loads the action ('Find') and the resource ('poems'). There is no redundant information or filler; every word contributes to the core purpose.

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?

For a single-parameter search tool, the description is minimally adequate: the schema documents the parameter fully and the tool name plus description imply the return value. However, the lack of disambiguation from search_by_lines and the absence of any output/return details leave notable gaps for an agent, especially without annotations or an output schema.

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%, and the schema already explains that 'linecount' is an exact number of lines. The description's phrase 'specific number of lines' adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a clear verb ('Find') and resource ('poems') with an explicit attribute ('specific number of lines'), so the tool's purpose is understandable. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool search_by_lines, which could easily be confused with it.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus search_by_lines or search_combined. The description implies a line-count lookup but does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to guess.

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