mcp-synology

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

Annotations establish read-only safety; description adds crucial operational details: pattern uses 'substring match (not glob)' and accepts 'human-readable sizes like 500MB'. Could mention result limits or pagination behavior, but covers primary query semantics well.

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?

Five sentences, all value-add: purpose statement, pattern semantics, extension example, size format, and sibling alternatives. No redundancy or generic fluff. Front-loaded with the recursive search capability.

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 9 parameters with zero schema descriptions, the description successfully covers the critical functional parameters (pattern, extension, size range, folder_path). Minor gap: filetype and exclude_pattern are undocumented, though output schema exists to describe results.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description compensates by explaining pattern (substring vs glob), extension (with mkv example), and size parameters (human-readable formats). Missing documentation for filetype, exclude_pattern, and limit parameters, but covers the essential search criteria adequately.

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?

Description opens with specific verb (Search) + resource (files) + scope (recursively) + filtering dimensions (keyword, extension, size range). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_files (for directory contents) and get_dir_size (for sizes).

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?

Explicitly names alternatives and when to use them: 'For directory contents or sizes, use list_files or get_dir_size instead.' Also clarifies the distinction between pattern and extension parameters to prevent misuse.

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