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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States what it does and required input, but does not disclose traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or behavior when no mentions exist. Acceptable for a simple lookup tool.

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 sentences: first lists sources, second adds context and prerequisite. Efficient with minimal redundancy, though the first sentence is slightly long.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, description adequately explains purpose, input, and sources. No mention of return format, but that is expected given no output schema.

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 has 100% coverage describing the 'id' parameter format. Description adds value by explaining where to obtain the id (from search or list_cips) and referencing it in context.

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?

Specifies exact verb 'find' and resource 'references' across multiple sources. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_cip (retrieve specific CIP) and get_discussion (retrieve a specific discussion).

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 'Celestia-specific cross-reference — use to see who is discussing a CIP and where.' Mentions prerequisite (CIP id from search or list_cips). Does not explicitly state when not to use, but sibling list provides context.

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