search_stored_procedure_text

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior fully. It mentions case-insensitive matching, excerpt with first line, and optional schema filter. However, it fails to describe the required 'source' parameter, which is critical for the tool's operation.

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 with no fluff, front-loaded with the action. Could be slightly improved by including the missing source parameter, but overall efficient.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, missing explanation of the 'source' parameter in the input schema makes it incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and 2 required ones.

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 explain all parameters. It only partially explains 'keyword' (as *keyword*) and 'schema' (restrict to single schema). The required 'source' parameter is not mentioned at all, which is a significant omission.

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 the body of stored procedures for a keyword (case-insensitive), returns an excerpt, and optionally restricts to a schema. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_stored_procedures, get_stored_procedure (by name), or search_stored_procedures (likely by name).

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?

Implied usage is for searching stored procedure definitions for text. However, no guidance is given on when to use this tool over siblings like search_stored_procedures or search_columns, nor are there 'when-not' or alternative suggestions.

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