search_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds useful behavioral details: it returns POSIX paths and behaves like 'find -name'. However, it omits details like default recursion depth, handling of hidden files, and error behavior, leaving gaps.

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 one concise sentence that packs purpose, method, and output with no redundancy. It is front-loaded and every word adds value.

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 moderate-complexity tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers core purpose and return type adequately. The 'find -name' reference and maxDepth parameter imply recursive search, but explicit default behavior is not stated, leaving minor completeness gaps.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters explained). The description only reinforces pattern semantics via 'find -name' and does not compensate for the undocumented 'distro' parameter. Overall, it adds minimal value 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 clearly states verb 'Find', resource 'files in WSL', and method 'by name pattern (find -name)'. It also specifies output ('matching POSIX paths'), distinguishing it from siblings like search_content (content search) and list_directory (listing).

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 clearly implies this tool is for locating files by name pattern in WSL, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks exclusions but is still directional.

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