search_files_and_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states that the tool searches by name, but does not disclose read-only status, side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's purpose, earning its place by conveying the essential function without unnecessary detail.

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 having an output schema (reducing the need to explain return values), the description fails to provide context on recursion, path scope, or result limits. Given four parameters and no annotations, the description is too minimal to fully guide an agent in using the tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It only hints at the 'query' parameter via 'by their names', but the other three parameters (path, recursive, max_results) are left unexplained. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 that the tool searches files and folders by name. It uses a specific verb ('arar' - searches) and resource ('dosya ve klasörleri' - files and folders), and the name-based search distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_directory or get_file_or_folder_info.

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-based searching but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_directory or get_file_or_folder_info. It does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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