xml_xml_find

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return fields (tag, text, attrs, child tag names) but omits error behavior (e.g., if no match found), performance traits, or side effects. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Three short sentences that efficiently convey purpose, output, and usage hints. No redundant phrasing; every sentence adds value.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description covers input, logic, and output well. An output schema is present, further clarifying return structure. Missing details on edge cases (no match) but otherwise complete.

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 description must compensate. It provides XPath examples, adding practical meaning, but does not explicitly describe the 'xml_string' parameter format or the 'xpath' syntax beyond examples. The examples help but leave gaps.

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 precisely states the tool finds the first element matching an XPath expression, lists return fields (tag, text, attrs, child tag names), and provides examples. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like xml_xml_findall by focusing on 'first element'.

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 gives XPath example patterns indicating common use cases, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., xml_xml_findall for multiple matches). No when-not-to-use or failure behavior guidance.

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