search_bundles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description reinforces read-only nature and describes the return JSON structure, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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 plus an installation hint and alternative. Front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information, each sentence adds value.

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, description specifies returned fields (results with name, kind, signature, bundle; bundles_searched). Covers usage, parameters, behavior, and output format comprehensively.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. Description adds extra context like 'FQN' for query, clarifies kind filters by symbol kind, and notes default limit (20), improving semantics beyond what schema alone provides.

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?

Clearly states it searches pre-indexed bundles for symbols from popular libraries, with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tool 'search' by noting that for project source code search, one should use 'search' instead.

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 (go-to-definition into node_modules/vendor), mentions installation prerequisite via CLI, and provides a clear alternative ('search' for project source code).

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