Glob Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It conveys a read-only search behavior and gives a concrete glob example, but it does not disclose details such as recursion behavior, hidden-file handling, symlink following, or error semantics. It is not misleading, but it is minimally transparent.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action, target, example, and scope are all present, and every word contributes to understanding the tool.

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 simple two-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete. It tells the agent what to search, how (glob), and where (under path). Minor gaps like recursion or hidden-file behavior would be useful but are not critical for basic 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 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema's bare string fields. It does: 'pattern' is clarified as a glob pattern with an example, and 'path' is established as the base under which the search occurs. It does not mention the default path value, but the schema already provides that.

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 action (search), the resource (files), and the scope (under path). It differentiates itself from siblings like list_dir by emphasizing glob pattern matching, though it does not explicitly name a sibling for contrast.

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 use case is implied: use this when you need to find files matching a glob pattern under a path. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this instead of list_dir, exists, or read_file, nor any exclusion criteria.

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