search_functions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It correctly implies a read-only search operation and mentions return of 'full metadata', but does not disclose any specific behavioral traits like auth requirements or rate limits. The description is adequate for a search tool.

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 five sentences with no wasted words. Each sentence adds distinct information: what it does, when to use it, scope options, output, and pagination. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 8 nested parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description provides an adequate but incomplete overview. It covers core functionality and pagination but omits key parameter details, so the agent may need to rely on the input schema for full parameter semantics.

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. It explains pattern and search_signatures implicitly, and hints at pagination (limit/offset), but fails to mention important parameters like path, deduplicate, exclude_paths, and case_sensitive. This leaves significant ambiguity for the agent.

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 it searches functions by name or signature using regex, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_functions' (which likely lists all functions) by specifying pattern-based search across the codebase.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when looking for functions...' providing clear context for usage. However, it does not mention when not to use or explicitly list alternatives, which would make it a 5.

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