discover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The single word 'discover' gives no indication of whether this is a read or write operation, what resources it accesses, what permissions might be required, or any behavioral characteristics. This provides zero transparency about how the tool behaves.

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?

While technically concise with just one word, this represents severe under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description fails to provide any meaningful information that would help an agent understand or use the tool. Every sentence should earn its place, but this has no sentences at all - just a single unhelpful word.

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 complete lack of annotations, no output schema, and 78 sibling tools, the description 'discover' is completely inadequate. It provides no information about what the tool discovers, how it works, what it returns, or why an agent would choose it over other tools. This fails to provide even basic contextual understanding.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to compensate for any parameter documentation gaps. While the description doesn't discuss parameters (because there are none), this is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool, warranting a baseline score of 4.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 78 sibling tools on the server, the lack of any contextual information about appropriate use cases leaves the agent completely without direction for selecting this specific tool among many options.

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