search_by_size

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it finds files and sorts results. It gives no insight into read-only behavior, permission needs, or side effects. It is minimally informative for a presumably safe read operation.

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 sentences, no filler. The first sentence delivers the purpose, and the second adds two critical constraints. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite good schema coverage, the description omits important context: there is no output schema, yet it doesn't hint at return format, pagination (maxResults default 20), directory traversal (maxDepth), or how include/exclude patterns interact with size filtering. For a tool with 7 parameters, this is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already described. The description adds value by specifying 'At least one of minSize or maxSize is required' (a constraint not in schema) and 'Results sorted by size descending' (behavioral detail). This goes beyond the baseline 3.

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 'Find files within a size range', immediately identifying the tool's purpose. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_by_date or find_largest, which target other criteria.

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?

It mentions support for min, max, or both and requires at least one size parameter, but does not specify when to use this tool instead of alternatives like find_largest (for top files) or search (for name-based queries). No explicit exclusions or context for directory traversal.

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