find_files

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: capped file list, walk-bounded (skips node_modules/build, time-boxed). With no annotations provided, this adds significant transparency beyond the basic purpose. It does not cover all aspects like permissions or side effects, but the disclosed traits are valuable.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and key behavioral constraints. Every part adds value, with no redundant or extraneous words.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage hint, and behavioral boundaries. However, it lacks details on return value format, error conditions, or permission requirements, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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?

The description adds meaning to the `q` parameter by explaining it supports substring and glob patterns. It also hints at `maxResults` with 'capped file list'. However, `projectPath` is entirely undocumented, and schema coverage is low (33%). The description partially compensates but not fully.

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 the tool's purpose: finding files by name using substring or glob patterns. It also distinguishes itself by mentioning it replaces Bash `find -name` and describes its bounded behavior, making it distinct from sibling tools like search_text or concept_search.

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 provides some guidance by stating it replaces Bash `find -name`, implying usage in place of shell commands. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives like search_text or concept_search, and does not mention when not to use the tool.

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