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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'without acting' consistency and a note that find uses regex/args.queries with matching refs, but says nothing about result shape, pagination, or limits per kind.

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?

It is front-loaded with the key idea and contains no filler, but the bulk is a single sprawling sentence with parenthetical asides, making it hard to scan for the relevant kind.

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?

With twelve kinds and a nested args object and no output schema, an agent can pick a kind but cannot tell what each returns or how args interacts with each kind. Adequate to start, but incomplete for correct invocation across modes.

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 83%, so baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning beyond the schema: find's query is a regex (with an example), args.queries can provide multiple patterns, matching elements come with refs, and the query field also filters links.

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 opening 'Get data without acting' states a specific verb and scope and implicitly contrasts with the sibling 'act' tool. The enumerated kinds make the resource concrete, though the sentence is a dense list rather than a crisp purpose statement.

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?

'Without acting' implies when to use this over 'act', and it usefully states 'there is no separate find tool', routing that query here. But it gives no guidance versus other read siblings like snapshot or evaluate, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond required session fields.

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