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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose. Since no annotations are provided, it carries the full burden but fails to mention whether this is a read-only operation, authentication requirements, or side effects. The presence of parameters like npub and dpop_token suggests auth needs but are unmentioned.

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 a single, short sentence, which is concise. However, it sacrifices important details for brevity. It is adequately structured but leaves much unsaid.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, parameter usage beyond examples, or any operational context. The description fails to provide a complete understanding of the tool's behavior.

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 description coverage is low (33%), with only 'keyword' having a description. The tool description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. For 'npub' and 'dpop_token', neither the schema nor description explains their role, leaving the agent guessing.

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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('which service handles a given intent'). It is clear about the tool's goal but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools, many of which also involve service-related operations. The example in the keyword parameter helps clarify.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings or alternatives. The description lacks context for appropriate invocation, such as prerequisites or exclusion criteria. With many similar tools, explicit usage guidance is missing.

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