Storm Asset Find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that files are 'decrypted' and how an empty query behaves, but says nothing about permission requirements, result caps, or cost for a broad glob.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler; the search semantics come first, the return fields second, and the special empty-query case last. Nothing is padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so listing return fields is arguably redundant, but the description still omits the meaning of the cpk/ext/game filters and the limit parameter, which an agent needs to narrow results on a 5-parameter tool.

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 0% across 5 parameters, so the description carries the burden. It explains query (path substring or glob) and the empty-query case well, but leaves cpk, ext, game, and limit entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 (search) and resource (decrypted CPK files) with explicit scope over named game builds, so the agent knows exactly what it queries. It does not distinguish itself from the closely related sibling storm_asset_info, leaving the boundary to inference.

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 note 'Empty query = per-game/per-CPK overview' implies a usage mode, and 'substring or glob' hints at query form, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison against alternatives like storm_asset_info or storm_find.

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