search_in_files

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (file, line number, text), which is useful, but it does not mention behavior such as default path, recursion behavior, or treatment of binary files. It also doesn't explicitly state it's a read-only operation, though that is implied. This is a minimal disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core action and output without excess 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?

The tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only provides a basic overview and does not address parameter usage or output structure beyond the three fields. Given the complexity, this is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain any of the five parameters. The term 'Grep' implies that 'query' is a search pattern, but path, regex, file_type, and max_results are not described. This is a significant gap given the number of parameters.

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 the specific verb 'Grep' and identifies the resource as 'project file contents', with a clear output specification (matching file, 1-based line number and text). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'search_files', which could be interpreted as searching file names or contents, so it falls short of the highest score.

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 alternatives such as search_files or other analysis tools. The description does not mention any context, exclusions, or alternatives.

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