globFind files matching a path pattern and return a compact list of matches for use in AI and CLI workflows.
Find files matching a glob pattern. Returns a compact list of paths.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cwd | No | Working directory for the glob | |
| pattern | Yes | Glob pattern (e.g. 'src/**/*.ts') |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | Yes | ||
| files | Yes | ||
| retained | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v5.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds that results are a compact list of paths, but it does not mention recursion behavior, hidden-file handling, or cwd defaults.
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?
Two short sentences with zero waste, and the primary action is front-loaded before the return-value note.
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?
Because an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, with many search-related siblings, it should do more to clarify when glob is the right choice.
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 100%, so the pattern and cwd parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or behavioral detail beyond what the schema provides.
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 and resource: find files matching a glob pattern. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from siblings such as find_files, ls, or rg.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use glob instead of find_files, ls, tree, or rg. The only implied usage is from the word 'glob,' and no exclusions or alternative selection criteria are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.