search_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It communicates the main behavior—searching for files below a directory using a glob—and gives concrete examples. It omits edge details such as recursion semantics, hidden files, case sensitivity, and error behavior, but for a simple search operation the description is adequate.

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, focused sentence with no filler. The main action is front-loaded and the glob examples are compact and immediately informative.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema available, so the description does not need to explain return values. Together with the schema, the description gives an agent enough to understand what the tool does and how to call it. It could add more explicit differentiation from list_directory, but the core context is complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare schema. It does explain that 'pattern' is a glob and gives examples like '*.py' or 'README*', and it suggests that 'path' is the directory from which to search. It does not provide formal definitions, but the description adds useful meaning beyond the parameter titles.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find files below a directory using a glob'. The verb 'Find' plus the resource 'files below a directory' and the glob examples identify the intended operation. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling list_directory, but the recursive 'below a directory' and glob-based matching clearly imply a different behavior.

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 implies that this tool should be used when the agent needs to locate files by glob pattern under a directory, which is a reasonable usage signal. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over list_directory or other siblings, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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