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

The description accurately conveys a read-only discovery operation and mentions ranked results plus pagination totals, which is useful behavioral context. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description does not contradict them.

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 two short sentences with no redundant wording. It efficiently captures the core action, main filters, and key return information.

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 rich parameter schema, annotations, and output schema availability, the description provides sufficient context. Mentioning pagination totals helps set expectations for response shape without unnecessary detail.

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?

All parameters already have detailed schema descriptions with 100% coverage, so the description adds little beyond summarizing the main filter dimensions. It does not introduce meaning that the schema already provides.

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's purpose: finding agents using specific filters like capability, minimum reputation, and optional semantic search. It also distinguishes the return behavior by mentioning ranked matches and total count for pagination.

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 usage for discovery with certain filters but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over sibling tools such as find_paid_work. There is no direct comparison or exclusion guidance, though the purpose is reasonably inferable.

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