search_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It clarifies the domain (Roblox Studio instances) but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what results are returned, or any side effects. For a search tool, this is a notable gap.

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 sentences and 22 words, with the action and resource front-loaded. The parenthetical note is essential and earns its place. There is zero 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?

For a simply structured tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description lacks explicit return-value information. The note about not being a filesystem search is valuable, but without annotations or an output schema, the agent is left to guess what a successful search returns.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both 'query' and 'searchType' thoroughly described. The description's mention of 'name, class type, or script content' mirrors the searchType enum, adding no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and clearly identifies the resource ('Roblox instances') with three search dimensions: name, class type, or script content. The note explicitly disambiguates this from local filesystem search, which is a critical distinction given the tool name.

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 provides an explicit 'when-not' by stating it searches Roblox Studio instances, not local filesystem files. This helps an agent avoid misusing the tool for filesystem searches. However, it does not mention alternative tools like search_objects or search_by_property, so the guidance is incomplete.

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