find_files

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions glob matching and subdirectory limiting but does not clarify if search is recursive, whether hidden files are included, or any edge cases. Lacks depth for a read tool with no 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?

Description is minimal and efficient: one sentence overview plus parameter list. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with action and example.

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 simple tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential usage. Missing details like recursion depth and hidden file behavior, but output schema handles return values. Adequate for most agents.

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%, but the description explains both parameters: 'pattern' as a glob pattern, 'subdir' as directory limit with '.' for everything. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema defaults, though could be more precise about pattern scope (e.g., full path vs basename).

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 clearly states the tool finds files by name pattern using glob, with examples. It distinguishes from siblings like list_files and search_files by focusing on name-based pattern matching.

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 usage for name-pattern searches but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_files or list_files. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance.

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