Open Kioku Search Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by stating it searches the local Tantivy index only, and mentions ranking and metadata in results, providing context beyond 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 well-structured, front-loaded with the main purpose and key details, followed by mode explanation and clear exclusions. It is concise for the amount of information conveyed, with no redundant sentences.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (search with modes, 4 parameters, output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers the scope, result metadata, mode behavior, and limitations (local index) without needing to repeat output schema details.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds meaning by explaining the 'mode' parameter and its use cases, and provides usage context that clarifies when to invoke the tool with different parameters. It does not repeat schema details but adds contextual semantics.

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 that the tool searches indexed file names and contents for keywords or file path patterns, returning ranked matches with metadata. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by stating not to use for browsing all files (list_files), code snippet search (search_code), or regex line matching (regex_search).

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool (for file path, filename, or file-content keyword) and when not to use it, listing alternative tools for specific cases (list_files, search_code, regex_search). It also explains the mode=graph usage for graph-node documents.

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