search_files

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only and non-destructive, so the description adds little beyond noting the 'sandbox directory' scope. It fails to explain how the query is used or what behavior results, especially given the mismatch between the name and description.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks essential information about the query parameter and the tool's actual purpose, making it ineffective.

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 and only one parameter, the description is incomplete due to the name/description contradiction, lack of parameter semantics, and no usage context. It does not sufficiently leverage existing structural information or provide additional necessary context.

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 0%, and the description entirely omits the meaning of the 'query' parameter. The phrase 'Read a note' does not clarify how a query string factors into the operation, leaving the only parameter completely unexplained.

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 states a specific action ('Read a note') and a location ('sandbox directory'), but this conflicts with the tool name 'search_files', which suggests a search operation. It does not distinguish from siblings like fetch_doc or query_records, and the actual purpose is unclear given the query parameter.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools (ping, query_records, fetch_doc). It only states a generic action without context or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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