Search Files

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

Annotations cover readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is given. Description adds valuable non-structured context: SharePoint results require the mcp.sharepoint App Role, and lists the exact returned fields. This is genuinely beyond what the schema/annotations provide.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then filters, then return values, then auth requirement, then Chinese intent keywords. Efficient overall; the Chinese intent list is useful for routing but slightly bulky.

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?

Covers purpose, filters, returns, and the SharePoint App Role requirement. With no output schema, the description does list key return fields, which is helpful, but omits pagination/top behavior nuance beyond the schema default and broader auth expectations. Adequate but leaves gaps.

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 100% and includes enum and bounds descriptions, so the schema carries parameter meaning. Description summarizes filters (site, file type, modification date) but adds no format/syntax detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb+resource ('Find documents across OneDrive and SharePoint sites') and explicitly names the coverage scope ('the signed-in user can open'). Differentiates from sibling files_get_download_url by stating the returned fields feed into it.

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?

Clear context for when to use (keyword search across OneDrive/SharePoint, filterable by site/type/date) and points explicitly at files_get_download_url as the follow-up. No explicit 'when not to use' or named alternative search tools, but nothing is misleading.

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