find_nodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation, omitting details about search semantics (e.g., glob vs. regex), whether the search is recursive, or what the return format looks like. This is a significant gap for an agent relying on the description alone.

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 that is direct and front-loaded, with no redundant wording. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unrelated details.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse to be complete. It fails to explain parameter semantics (especially root_path), return values, or search behavior, leaving an agent with insufficient information to reliably invoke the tool.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains 'pattern' and 'type' but completely ignores 'root_path'. It also does not specify the expected pattern syntax, leaving one parameter undocumented and the others only partially clarified.

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 function: find nodes by name pattern, with an optional type filter. It uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('nodes'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_error_nodes or list_children.

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 when to use the tool (when searching for nodes by pattern) but provides no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of other tools or exclusions, so the context is clear but not fully elaborated.

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