search_code

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether results are paginated, rate limits, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The single example provides no behavioral depth beyond the fact that it searches.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus an example, with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be explained, but the tool has 2 parameters with 0% schema description coverage and no annotations. The description fails to cover query syntax variations, limit behavior, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.

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%. The description does not explain the 'limit' parameter's meaning or the 'query' format beyond a single example. The example partially compensates for query but not for limit, leaving the agent with minimal guidance beyond the schema's title and default value.

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 GitHub' and provides an example query, making the purpose specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like search_repositories (which searches repos) and list_issues (which searches issues).

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 like get_file_content for retrieving specific file contents. The example hints at query syntax but does not explain context or exclusions.

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