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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral details: case-insensitive partial matching, root default, and returned fields (path, type, size), which go beyond the structured annotations.

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 clear sentences front-load the main action and key parameters. No unnecessary words; every clause adds valuable 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 full schema coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete: it states the search behavior, defaults, and return types. The max_results and file_type filters are documented in the schema, so they need not be repeated here.

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 parameters are fully documented. The description repeats some schema info (case-insensitive, partial, home default) but does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Searches') with a concrete resource ('files and folders by name') and scope ('starting from a root directory'), while defining case-insensitive partial matching and output fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like file_list or cloud-specific search tools.

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 clear context on how to use the tool (search by name, root directory defaults to home) and what results are returned. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the local-file-context is strongly implied.

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