onedrive_search_filesSearch a user's OneDrive (Microsoft 365) for files and folders matching a query string across file names and content. Returns matching items with id, name, size, folder flag, last-modified time, and web URL. Use to find documents by keyword.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| top | No | Maximum number of results to return (default 25). | |
| query | Yes | Free-text search query matched against OneDrive file names and content. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "query": "budget 2024"
+ },
+ {
+ "query": "Q4 financial report",
+ "top": 50
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds search scope and return fields, which is useful context without contradicting 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 concise sentences: first explains operation and output, second provides usage advice. No unnecessary 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?
For a simple search tool with well-annotated safety and complete schema, the description provides sufficient behavioral and usage context.
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 covers both parameters with descriptions. The main description rephrases the query parameter's purpose without adding new meaning.
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 OneDrive files and folders by keyword across names and content, lists return fields, and is distinct from sibling tools like onedrive_get_file or onedrive_list_files.
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 implies use for keyword-based document finding but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.