everything_find_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that searching is by name keyword and an optional parent directory, which is useful, but it does not disclose match semantics (exact, substring, wildcard), result shape, pagination behavior, or system-level assumptions. The high-level behavior is clear, but important details are missing.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and the primary optional filter, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about what a caller receives and how search behavior works. It does not explain what happens when 'name' is omitted, whether wildcard patterns are supported, or how results are returned and ordered. The tool is not complex, but the current description leaves several practical questions unanswered.

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 only 33%, and the description only re-emphasizes 'name' and 'parent_directory' without adding detail. It does not explain the semantics of 'sort', 'offset', 'ascending', or 'max_results', leaving the agent to infer their meaning from names and defaults alone.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') with a clear resource ('folders and directories') and states the main search criteria ('by name keyword and optional parent directory'). It is easy to distinguish from everything_find_files, though it does not explicitly name or contrast sibling 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of everything_find_files or everything_search. The description implies it is for folder searches but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative selection criteria.

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