find_recent_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions time filtering, omitting details on default behavior, error handling, server selection, or limitations (e.g., max hours, recursive behavior). This is insufficient for a mutation-like operation.

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 a single sentence of 7 words, extremely concise with no wasted words. However, for a tool with 4 parameters and complex behavior, slightly more detail could improve clarity without losing conciseness.

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?

The description lacks information about return values, error cases, and default behaviors. Given the absence of an output schema, it should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of file paths, metadata). It also does not mention the role of the server parameter or any prerequisites.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema definitions. It does not elaborate on any parameter, but the schema already specifies each parameter's purpose clearly.

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 'Find files modified within a time period' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the tool's action and condition. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_directory and check_file_exists by focusing on modification time filtering.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_files or list_directory. The description implies a use case but does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or offer context for selection.

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