Search Code

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering the core behavioral traits. The description adds only a prerequisite ('Requires GitLab code search support'), which is minor and does not expand on behavior like response format, pagination, or error handling.

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 front-load the core purpose and a key requirement. Every sentence earns its place; no unnecessary words.

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?

Despite no output schema and low param documentation, the description does not mention return format, pagination behavior, or error conditions. For a search tool with 6 parameters and no schema descriptions, more context is needed for complete understanding.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain any of the 6 parameters. Even though parameter names (e.g., search, filename, extension) are self-explanatory, no details on usage, formats, or constraints are provided, leaving the agent to rely solely on inference.

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 'Search code across all projects on the GitLab instance' with a specific verb and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like gitlab_search_project_code (project-scoped) and gitlab_search_code_blobs (blob-scoped) by emphasizing the global search across all projects.

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 global code search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus project-specific alternatives (e.g., gitlab_search_project_code) or when to avoid it. No direct comparison or exclusion criteria provided.

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