Search files in a directory using glob patterns like '.py' or '.json'. Specify a root path and pattern to instantly locate matching files, simplifying file discovery.
Search for files matching a glob pattern in a directory path.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | Search root directory path. | . |
| pattern | No | Glob search pattern (e.g. '*.py', '*.json'). | * |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. It does not mention whether the search is recursive, whether hidden files are included, or whether results are absolute or relative paths. The operation is clear but these ambiguities remain.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the core action and the key qualifiers (glob pattern, directory path) – the essence of the tool.
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 two parameters, complete schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves out useful context like recursive behavior and result format. It could also differentiate itself from file_list, which would improve an agent's selection accuracy. Given the low complexity, a 3 is reasonable.
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 schema documents both path and pattern. The description restates the same meaning ('glob pattern', 'directory path') without adding semantics like relative vs absolute paths or default behavior for path='.'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting.
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 clear verb ('Search') and resource ('files') plus the distinguishing glob pattern and directory path. It differentiates from file_list and other file tools by being pattern-based rather than direct listing.
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 implies when to use it (pattern-based search) but provides no explicit alternatives, conditions, or exclusions. It does not mention file_list as a simpler alternative or when one should prefer a direct list over globbing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.