discover

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds specific behavioral detail by stating exactly what each discovery call returns, including the no-argument case. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence with semicolon-separated variants, effectively front-loading the meta nature and covering all four modes with zero waste. Every clause 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description adequately explains the return behavior for each mode (domains, tools, schema, search results). Given that this is a lightweight meta-discovery tool, it fully covers what an agent needs to know to invoke it correctly.

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 a baseline of 3 applies. The description elevates this by grouping parameters into distinct usage modes and clarifying the empty-call behavior, which the schema alone doesn't explicitly state. It adds a little semantic value beyond the schema, though not extensive.

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 clearly identifies this as a [META] tool to 'Discover the tool surface', with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from operational siblings by enumerating four explicit discovery modes: listing domains, listing domain tools, retrieving full tool schemas, and keyword searching.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance for each invocation variant (no args, domain, tool, search). Although it doesn't name alternatives, none of the sibling tools offer this introspection capability, so the usage context is unambiguous and complete.

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