Skip to main content
Glama

search_by_name

Search Laserfiche entries by name pattern with optional wildcards and folder scope. Returns matching files and folders.

Instructions

Find entries by file/folder name pattern, optionally scoped to a folder path.

Use when the user is searching by name and the full Laserfiche query syntax is overkill. This wraps search_entries with a {LF:Name="..."} (plus optional {LF:LookIn="..."}) clause built for you.

Args: name_pattern: A name with optional wildcards — * matches any sequence, ? matches one character. Examples: "Onboarding*" (starts-with), "*.pdf" (ends-with), "Smith,?" (exactly one char after the comma). in_folder_path: Backslash-delimited Laserfiche path to scope the search to. Example: "\Imports\2024". max_results: Page size (default 25, capped by LF_MAX_RESULTS_CEILING).

Returns: same SearchResults shape as search_entries.

On failure: returns {"mode": "error", "error": <slug>, ...}. See docs/error-contract.md. Note that SimpleSearches is the same fragile endpoint behind search_entries — fall back to search_natural if you get repeated server_error results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
name_patternYesName with optional wildcards. `*` matches any sequence (including empty); `?` matches exactly one character. Case-insensitive. No wildcards = exact match.
in_folder_pathNoOptional backslash-delimited folder path to scope the search. Forward slashes are also accepted.
max_resultsNoPage size (default 25, capped by LF_MAX_RESULTS_CEILING).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly states it wraps `search_entries` with LF:Name and LookIn clauses, describes error returns ('mode: error'), and notes endpoint fragility and fallback advice. This is comprehensive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with sections (Args, Returns, On failure). Front-loaded with purpose. Each sentence adds value, though slightly verbose for those familiar with the domain. Still, no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, usage, all parameters with details, error handling, and fallback advice. Output schema exists but description references return shape. For a search tool with moderate complexity, this is complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds significant value beyond schema: explains wildcard behavior with examples, folder path format, default max_results. This justifies a 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it finds entries by name pattern with optional folder scoping. It contrasts with sibling `search_entries` by explaining it wraps that with a specific clause, and mentions fallback to `search_natural`. The verb 'Find' and resource 'entries' are specific.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Specifies when to use: 'when searching by name and full query syntax is overkill'. Also advises fallback to `search_natural` on repeated errors. Does not explicitly list when not to use, but provides a clear context for appropriate use.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SamuelSHernandez/laserfiche-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server