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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the search function, offering no details about read-only nature, return format, pagination, or behavior when the query and capability parameters are combined.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and scope. Every word contributes meaning; there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what the tool returns, but it only says 'find' without specifying the result type (e.g., a list of agents). It also omits information about how limit behaves or whether capability and query are mutually exclusive. For a simple search tool, this is a clear gap.

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?

The schema already describes query and capability, and the description reinforces their roles. The limit parameter, however, lacks any schema or description detail, leaving ambiguity about its purpose and default behavior. With 67% schema coverage, the description provides modest added value but does not fully compensate for the missing limit explanation.

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 verb 'Find' combined with resource 'AI agents' clearly states the tool's purpose as a search/discovery operation. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'get_agent' (which likely retrieves a specific agent) but does not explicitly note this distinction.

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 finding agents by capability or search query, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_agent, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The context is minimal and relies on inference.

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