Search text or regex across project code

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by disclosing that generated, dependency, and secret files are ignored, and that ripgrep is used with a fallback. This goes beyond annotations, though performance details (e.g., result limits) are missing.

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, both front-loaded with essential information. The first sentence describes speed and fallback, the second explains exclusions. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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 a complex tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details about return format, pagination, or how to interpret results. An agent would need more context to use the tool correctly, especially regarding parameter semantics and output behavior.

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 coverage is only 17% (only 'project' parameter described). The description does not explain the meaning of key parameters like glob, regex, maxResults, or caseSensitive. For example, it doesn't clarify that 'regex' enables regex search or that 'maxResults' limits output. The description fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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 the tool's function: high-speed code search using ripgrep with fallback. It also specifies what files are ignored, distinguishing it from siblings like search_files (file name search) and read_file (content reading). The verb+resource (search code) is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for code content search, but doesn't mention scenarios where other tools (like search_files or read_file) would be more appropriate. No when-not or exclusions are provided.

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