Search Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: path is checked against MACCTL_ALLOWED_PATHS/MACCTL_DENIED_PATHS, content search is size-capped, and results are capped. This goes beyond the 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 three sentences, each carrying distinct information: core search functionality, mdfind acceleration path, and path validation/caps. It is front-loaded and concise with no wasted words.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides substantial context: explains both search modes, the mdfindQuery requirement, path restrictions, and result caps. However, it does not describe the return format (e.g., list of paths), which would be useful given no output schema.

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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter meaning (e.g., mdfindQuery required when useMdfind is true) but does not add significant new detail beyond the schema. The schema already documents defaults and examples.

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 recursively searches a directory for files/directories matching a glob pattern and/or content regex. It specifies the unique features (useMdfind, content regex) that distinguish it from sibling tools like file_list or file_read.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool (searching by name/content) and provides guidance on using useMdfind to accelerate search via Spotlight. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the purpose is self-evident.

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