find_alternativesFind curated alternatives to a given AI tool by its directory slug. If the tool has shut down, returns live replacements. Good for "what should I use instead of X" questions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The directory slug of the tool to find alternatives for. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds valuable context: returns curated alternatives and special handling for shut-down tools. No contradiction.
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?
Two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose. No redundant information; every word adds value.
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 simple lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, and usage context. Annotations fill safety profile.
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% for the single parameter. Description rephrases 'slug' as 'directory slug', adding minimal extra meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description clearly states the tool finds curated alternatives by directory slug, with specific behavior for shut-down tools. Distinguishes from sibling tools like check_tool_status or list_tools.
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?
Includes a usage example ('what should I use instead of X'), providing clear context. Does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the example is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: checking status, comparing two tools, finding alternatives, getting a full profile, listing by category, and searching. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (check_tool_status, compare_tools, find_alternatives, etc.), making it predictable.
6 tools are well-scoped for a directory server, covering discovery, lookup, comparison, and status checks without being too few or too many.
The tool set fully covers user needs: search, list, get details, compare, find alternatives, and check lifecycle status. No obvious gaps for the intended purpose.