Skip to main content
Glama
boshyxd

Roblox Studio MCP Server

search_files

Search and locate files in Roblox Studio by name, type, or content patterns using the MCP Server, enabling precise file retrieval for project management and development.

Instructions

Find files by name, type, or content patterns

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query (name, type, or content pattern)
searchTypeNoType of search to performname

Implementation Reference

  • The searchFiles method in RobloxStudioTools class that executes the tool logic by sending a request to the Studio bridge API endpoint '/api/search-files' and formatting the response as MCP content.
    async searchFiles(query: string, searchType: string = 'name') {
      const response = await this.client.request('/api/search-files', { query, searchType });
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(response, null, 2)
          }
        ]
      };
    }
  • The input schema and metadata definition for the 'search_files' tool, provided in the MCP ListTools response.
    {
      name: 'search_files',
      description: 'Find files by name, type, or content patterns',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          query: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Search query (name, type, or content pattern)'
          },
          searchType: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['name', 'type', 'content'],
            description: 'Type of search to perform',
            default: 'name'
          }
        },
        required: ['query']
      }
    },
  • src/index.ts:650-651 (registration)
    The dispatch case in the MCP CallToolRequest handler that routes calls to the searchFiles tool method.
    case 'search_files':
      return await this.tools.searchFiles((args as any)?.query as string, (args as any)?.searchType || 'name');
  • HTTP endpoint registration in the server for direct '/mcp/search_files' calls, proxying to the tool handler.
    app.post('/mcp/search_files', async (req, res) => {
      try {
        const result = await tools.searchFiles(req.body.query, req.body.searchType);
        res.json(result);
      } catch (error) {
        res.status(500).json({ error: error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error' });
      }
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe permissions needed, whether it's read-only or has side effects, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what the output looks like. This is inadequate for a search tool with zero annotation coverage.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool and front-loads the essential information about what the tool does.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are formatted, whether there are limitations on search scope, or authentication requirements. Given the complexity of search operations and lack of structured metadata, more context is needed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters completely. The description mentions 'name, type, or content patterns' which aligns with the searchType enum values, but adds no additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'find' and resource 'files', specifying search criteria by 'name, type, or content patterns'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_objects' or 'search_by_property' by focusing specifically on files, but doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_objects', 'search_by_property', or 'get_file_tree'. It mentions search criteria but gives no context about prerequisites, limitations, or appropriate use cases.

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

Related 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/boshyxd/robloxstudio-mcp'

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