Search project file names or glob patterns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds that it does not read file contents. This is consistent but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like performance limits, error handling, or the definition of 'safe glob'. The description adds modest value beyond the 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that accurately front-loads the key purpose. It is efficient but could be slightly improved by including parameter hints without increasing length significantly.

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 tool has 6 parameters, low schema coverage, and no output schema. The description does not explain the return format (e.g., list of file paths), what constitutes a 'safe glob', or how maxResults and includeDirectories affect results. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 only 33% (path and project described in schema). The description does not add meaning for the other 4 parameters (query, mode, maxResults, includeDirectories), which are essential for usage. The phrase 'name substring or safe glob' hints at the mode parameter but provides no detail on syntax or constraints.

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 name substring or safe glob without reading contents. It specifies the verb 'finds', resource 'files', and method 'name substring or safe glob', which distinguishes it from content-searching siblings like search_code and read_file.

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 file discovery only, by contrasting with 'without reading file contents'. While it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, the context of siblings and the phrase 'without reading file contents' provides clear guidance for when to use this tool over content-search tools.

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