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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that this is a search against the Open Creator Graph and enumerates the returned fields. It omits result-set behavior such as empty-result handling and how limit affects paging.

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 short sentences: what it finds, what it returns, when to prefer it. Front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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?

Because no output schema exists, listing the returned fields (SPRK ID, name, handle, platforms, claim state, record URL) is genuinely necessary and supplied. The only missing piece is guidance on the limit parameter and result ordering.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage, the query param is well served: the description widens it beyond the schema's 'Name, handle or URL' by including SPRK ID. The limit parameter gets no explanation in the description and relies on the schema's default/min/max alone, so the gap is only partly compensated.

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 specific verb ('Find') and resource ('Creator records') plus the exact lookup keys (name, handle, SPRK ID, profile URL). An agent can immediately distinguish this from the sibling get_creator_record.

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 says to use it *before* get_creator_record when only a name or handle is known, naming both the alternative and the condition that selects this tool. No inference required.

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