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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and says nothing about permissions, whether results are paginated or ranked, or what the response contains. It also doesn't clarify whether the capability filter is an exact match, substring, or taxonomy lookup — a meaningful behavioral detail for a discovery 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the filter option is placed after the core purpose, which is the right order. It's efficient, though efficiency here partly reflects under-specification rather than tight writing.

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 one-parameter discovery tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum say what comes back and how the capability filter behaves. Neither is present, leaving the agent to infer both the return shape and the accepted filter values.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it only restates that 'capability' is an optional filter. It gives no format, example value, matching semantics, or indication of what values are valid — the agent still has to guess what to pass.

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 (AION agents) plus the optional filter, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling discover_external_agents — 'AION' hints at internal scope but never says so explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternative (discover_external_agents) despite it appearing in the sibling list. The only usage hint is that the filter is optional, which is already implied by zero required parameters.

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