phabricator_file_search

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

With no annotations, the description does not disclose any behavioral traits like read-only nature, destructive actions, rate limits, or pagination details. It only repeats the tool's name effectively, relying entirely on the input schema for parameter-level behavior.

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, which is concise but lacks substance. It is not verbose, but it does not add sufficient value to earn a higher score.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain return values or behavior. For a tool with 7 parameters, including nested objects and no required parameters, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention pagination, result order, or how constraints interact.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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 states 'Search for files in Phabricator', which is a clear verb+resource but very generic. It does not specify the type of search (e.g., by name, constraints, or built-in queries) and does not distinguish it from other search tools among siblings like phabricator_task_search or phabricator_document_search.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as phabricator_file_info or phabricator_file_upload. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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