telys_repo_search

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

Explicitly discloses that the tool re-runs incremental indexing on every call, writes to the store (contradicting any read-only assumption), and mentions performance ('cheap on no-change'). This goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint:false, idempotentHint:true) and provides valuable operational context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then moves to usage, parameters, failure modes, and a side-effect note. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy, making it concise yet comprehensive.

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 lacking an output schema, the description covers the tool's behavior, side effects, failure modes, prerequisites, and parameter usage. It provides enough context for an agent to call the tool correctly and understand the consequences, including that it is not read-only.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate. It explains path_hint ('exact repo-relative path to scope the search'), top_k (default 5), and notes query is required. While query semantics are not elaborated beyond being required, the description covers all parameters adequately for a search tool.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+method: 'Search the auto-indexed repo collection with the on-device embedder.' It clearly defines the tool's scope and distinguishes it from generic search (telys_search) by focusing on the auto-indexed repo collection and its re-indexing behavior.

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?

Provides a clear use case ('map this codebase and search it' workflows), required/optional parameters, failure conditions, and setup instructions. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives like telys_search, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when to use this tool.

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