Find nodes by name or type

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

The description discloses the underlying behavior: it fetches a file tree and locally filters to matching nodes, returning only a specific subset of fields. Since readOnlyHint already signals non-mutating behavior, this additional internal mechanism is useful and adequate.

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 compact, immediately states the operation, then lists the return subset and key usage caveat. No wasted or vague prose.

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?

There is no output schema, so listing the returned fields is valuable. The description also explains the internal mechanism (fetch file tree, filter matches) and the precondition (name and/or type). It does not mention rate/cost implications of fetching a large file tree, but covers the essentials for invocation.

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 high, but the description adds meaningful semantic guidance: name and/or type are required as filters, and the return payload is limited to the listed fields. This helps the agent understand how the optional parameters actually function together, despite the schema only enforcing `file`.

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 a specific action: fetch a file tree and return only nodes matching name/type filters, with a limited field subset. It also explicitly positions itself as a utility rather than a REST endpoint, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_file and get_nodes.

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?

Explicitly says 'Prefer this over dumping get_file to locate a frame', giving clear when-to-use guidance. It also states the input precondition 'Requires name and/or type'. It does not explicitly contrast with get_nodes, but the guidance is strong enough to route an agent correctly.

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