kickstarter_discover

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses key behaviors: it returns exactly one page of results, supports multiple sort orders, and describes the result payload (funding snapshot, category, location, creator, cover photo). It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but for a read-only browse tool those are secondary.

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 packs a lot into two sentences, front-loading the core action and then listing options and return fields without fluff. Every clause adds information; the sort values and result fields are listed efficiently.

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 tool with 6 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: what it browses, what filters/sorts exist, and what each result contains. It lacks the valid campaign state values and page-size details, but these are minor given the schema's own descriptions.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by enumerating the sort options (magic/popularity/newest/end_date/most_funded) that the schema's 'Result order' description leaves vague. It also ties the parameters together into a coherent browsing workflow, though it doesn't enumerate the allowed campaign state values.

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 says 'Browse or search Kickstarter's Discover surface' and 'Returns one page of Kickstarter's own Discover results,' naming a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like kickstarter_project and kickstarter_comments by focusing on the Discover browsing surface.

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 clear context for when to use it: for browsing or searching campaigns by category, search term, sort, state, and staff pick. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like kickstarter_project for a single project, so it falls short of full exclusion guidance.

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