search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure burden but fails to mention read-only safety, result pagination behavior, case sensitivity rules, or partial vs exact matching behavior for the query parameter.

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?

Single sentence of nine words is efficiently structured with action front-loaded. However, extreme brevity leaves significant gaps in behavioral and usage guidance that should have been included given the lack of annotations or output schema.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. Missing critical context: result structure/format, whether results include metadata or just paths, behavior when query finds no matches, and how max_results pagination works.

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% with all three parameters documented. Description adds minimal context beyond schema—'by name' clarifies the query parameter's purpose slightly, but doesn't add syntax details, examples, or clarify the path parameter's format expectations beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Description provides specific verb ('Search'), specific resource ('files and folders in Dropbox'), and specific method ('by name'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_folder (contents listing) and get_metadata (specific file info retrieval).

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?

Description lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_folder or get_metadata. No mention of search scope limitations, performance considerations, or when name-based search is preferred over browsing.

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