Search Merge Requests

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

The description does not contradict annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) and adds behavioral context about the global text search limitation, though it could also mention the default sort order or pagination behavior.

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?

Two sentences, each carrying essential information: first sentence explains the core functionality with concrete examples, second sentence provides a critical constraint. No wasted 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?

Given the cognitive complexity (8 parameters, 1 required) and no output schema, the description adequately covers input usage and limitations, though it does not describe the return format or response structure.

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?

The schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, but the description adds valuable semantic context beyond the schema, such as the accepted username formats and the requirement of projectPath for text searches.

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 searches merge requests by username (with examples of supported formats) or within a specific project, and distinguishes it from siblings like search_issues and get_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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each search mode (username vs. project text search), and includes a crucial limitation: 'GitLab does not support global text search for MRs - use projectPath for text searches.'

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