find_objects

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'search' action is consistent. The addition of 'glob' clarifies the name pattern matching behavior, but no other behavioral traits (e.g., return format, pagination) are disclosed. With annotations covering safety, this adds limited extra value.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and filter criteria, with no redundant information.

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 is adequate for a simple search tool with an output schema and read-only annotation. It covers the primary purpose and filter options, but lacks explicit guidance on optionality or relationship to sibling listing tools. The output schema likely documents return values.

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% for parameter descriptions. The tool description lists all four parameters (name_pattern, type, material, collection) and indicates the glob behavior for name_pattern, but provides no additional detail on valid values or formats for type, material, and collection. This partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 a search action targeting objects, listing concrete filter criteria (name pattern with glob, type, material, collection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_objects or get_object_info.

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 usage for filtered object search but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_objects or mention any exclusions. It lacks explicit alternatives or context.

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