search_uploaded_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses that MemoryPlugin file buckets persist across AI chats, and that the tool returns text passages with source file and page info. It doesn't mention potential errors or rate limits, but covers the main behavioral aspects.

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 well-structured and concise: purpose statement, output summary, and a bulleted 'Use when' list. All sentences earn their place with no redundancy.

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 fully explains what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it, including a caveat for ambiguity. It lacks an output schema, so the description's mention of text passages with source/page info fills that gap. Minor omissions like empty-result behavior prevent a 5.

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%, so each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds context that file buckets persist across chats, which gives meaning to bucketId, but overall the schema does the heavy lifting. 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches documents in the user's MemoryPlugin document library, explicitly excluding files uploaded directly to the conversation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_memories and clarifies the exact resource being searched.

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 'Use when' section provides explicit conditions: user mentions MemoryPlugin documents, or asks about 'my files' with no conversation files, and instructs to clarify if unsure. This gives clear guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives and when to ask for clarification.

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