everything_search

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

The description discloses read-only behavior and return types, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, or error behavior. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it covers basic safety but is not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences, each providing critical information: purpose, safety, and output. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain pagination, error conditions, or the meaning of 'bounded'. Given the tool's complexity, more detail is needed.

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%, with each parameter having a description in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema, warranting a baseline score of 3.

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 specifies the verb 'Search', the resource 'local Everything index', and the return type 'bounded file and folder paths'. It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'everything_health', which is for health checks.

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 states 'Read-only', implying it is safe and suitable for search operations. While it does not explicitly state when not to use it, the sibling context makes the intended usage clear.

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