Search GitLab

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context about search limitations (no assignee/label filtering, no global MR search) and the optional nature of credentials, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 (two sentences) with zero wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides critical usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place and is front-loaded with essential information.

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's moderate complexity (search across multiple resource types), the description is quite complete. It covers purpose, limitations, and alternatives well. The main gap is the lack of output schema, but the description doesn't need to explain return values. With good annotations and sibling context, it's nearly complete.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal parameter semantics beyond the schema, only implying that searchTerm can be empty for 'recent activity' which is somewhat helpful but not detailed.

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 performs 'Text search across GitLab projects and issues' with a specific verb ('search') and resources ('projects and issues'). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting what it doesn't support compared to search_issues and search_merge_requests.

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 explicit guidance on when NOT to use this tool ('Does not support filtering by assignee/labels - use search_issues for that' and 'MRs cannot be searched globally - use search_merge_requests with username'). This gives clear alternatives and boundaries for usage.

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