ck_fs_find

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

The description declares 'Read-only — no files are modified', which is critical behavioral info. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and handles it well. It could mention any output format or pagination but the read-only guarantee is strong.

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 concise, with a clear front-loaded purpose, parameter clarifications in natural language, and explicit sibling differentiation. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, behavior (read-only), and usage guidance. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional info.

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 description explains the meaning of 'query' (path fragment or glob pattern), 'path' (subdirectory relative to project root), and 'limit' (default 50). With 80% schema coverage, the description adds significant semantic value beyond the schema.

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 starts with a clear specific verb ('Find') and resource ('files or directories'), and immediately distinguishes from siblings by referencing ck_fs_grep and ck_fs_read. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('locate files by name or path') and when to use alternatives ('ck_fs_grep to search by file content', 'ck_fs_read to read a file at a known path'). This provides excellent guidance for the agent.

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