Discover Scrivener Projects

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

Annotations indicate read-only, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive. Description adds details: searches up to three levels deep, returns paths or message if none found. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage guidance and disclaimers. Every sentence is essential and well-placed. No redundancy.

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 one optional parameter, no output schema, and good annotations, the description covers behavior (depth of search), return values, and usage context completely. No missing information.

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 fully describes the optional searchPath parameter. Description adds value by listing default locations (Documents, Desktop, iCloud Mobile Documents), which are not in schema. This clarifies what 'common locations' means, enhancing usability.

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 scans common locations for Scrivener projects and returns paths of .scriv folders, searching up to three levels deep. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying use case when user refers to project by name rather than path, and clarifies it does not open anything.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (when user refers to project by name) and what to do after (present results, pass chosen path to open_project). Also states that it does not open anything itself, providing clear guidance.

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