file_search

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior directly. It only adds 'Optimized for WINDOWS,' which is a platform trait, but omits details such as return format, potential side effects, or handling of directories versus files. For a search tool, the agent is left with limited knowledge of what to expect.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core function. Every word adds value: the first sentence states the purpose, the second adds a platform optimization note. There is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema covers parameters, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about return values or limitations. It does clarify filename-based search and Windows optimization, making it minimally complete, but it lacks depth for a fully informed decision.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that 'pattern' accepts glob patterns, but it adds no additional detail about 'add_root' or 'activeFilePath' beyond the schema. No extra meaning is provided, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'Search for files by name or glob pattern.' This specifies the verb (Search), resource (files), and the method (name or glob pattern). It does not explicitly differentiate from search_code, but the description is specific enough to infer the tool searches by filename rather than content.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_code or read_dir. The only contextual hint is 'Optimized for WINDOWS,' which implies platform relevance but does not explain when to prefer this over sibling tools or mention any exclusions.

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