github_search_repo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that code search requires indexing, that anonymous rate limits apply, and that 'all' fans out in parallel. It does not detail side effects or error handling, but the disclosed behaviors are sufficient for safe invocation.

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 three sentences, concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the primary purpose. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and multiple search types, the description covers usage, constraints, and behavior adequately. It could note return format, but completeness is high for the complexity level.

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 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by explaining that 'all' fans out in parallel, that state is ignored for code, and default maxResults values. This enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 searches a GitHub repository across code, issues, and pull requests in one call, specifying the underlying API endpoints. It differentiates from sibling tools like github_get_repo_structure (structure) and github_read_file (reading files), making the purpose 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?

The description provides context on authentication (anonymous vs. token) and a prerequisite for code search (repo must be indexed). It implies usage for searching across repo content but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives, missing a small bit of guidance.

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