find_conferences

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains that the tool searches WikiCFP, merges and deduplicates results, filters out ended conferences, and sorts by submission deadline. This is clear and actionable for an agent.

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 three sentences, each adding necessary information: the core action, the search and merging process, and the sorting/filtering details. No fluff—every sentence earns its place.

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's moderate complexity (4 params, output schema present), the description adequately covers behavior and filtering. However, it could briefly mention the output schema's structure (e.g., 'returns conference names, deadlines, and links') since no output schema details are visible to the agent.

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 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds value by explaining how 'keywords' drives the search (each keyword yields results, which are merged) and how sorting works ('sorted by submission deadline'), but does not go beyond schema for other parameters like 'year', 'limit', or 'min_deadline'.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('upcoming conferences matching any of the given keywords'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search_conferences' (which likely searches by different criteria) or 'list_categories' (which organizes by category).

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 explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance is given, nor are siblings mentioned. The description implies usage (for keyword-based conference discovery), but the agent must infer that this tool is ideal when the user provides keywords, while 'conference_details' is for specific conferences and 'conferences_by_category' for browsing by category.

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