Find files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by stating that it returns a list of paths and describing its role as a pipeline producer, which goes beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, the pattern example aids comprehension, and the pipeline role is included in the second sentence without bloating the description.

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 simple read-only search tool, the description covers the main purpose, result type, and usage context. The recursive parameter semantics are not explicitly stated, but the schema default and clear parameter name make this a minor gap rather than a blocking omission.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives a concrete pattern example ('*.epub') and implies folder is the search location, but it does not explain the recursive parameter at all. The parameter names are reasonably self-explanatory, but the description still leaves one parameter's behavior to inference.

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?

States a specific action and resource: finds files matching a pattern in a folder and returns a list of paths. The producer-for-for_each note also clearly differentiates it from sibling read/write/execute tools.

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?

Explicitly describes when this fits: as the typical producer for for_each steps in run_pipeline. It does not name alternatives to exclude, but the pipeline usage context is clear enough for an agent to choose it appropriately.

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