Find Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is fully conveyed. The description adds that it returns files with metadata, which is useful but does not delve into further behavioral traits like pagination, performance, or error handling. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return type, alternatives. No filler, front-loaded with the core action, and well-structured for quick reading.

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 the output schema exists, return values are covered. The tool has 8 parameters but only one required; the description covers the main use case and sibling differentiation. However, it does not mention pagination or sorting (though schema covers them) and could slightly benefit from hinting at other sibling tools like ls or tree, but overall it's fairly 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only reinforces the pattern parameter implicitly ('Find files by glob pattern') and does not add new meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 finds files by glob pattern and returns files with metadata. It also distinguishes from siblings by name-dropping grep (content search) and search_and_replace (bulk edits), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly provides usage guidance: 'For content search, use grep. For bulk edits, pass the same glob to search_and_replace.' This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use advice, directly addressing alternative tools.

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