Find Work Email

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds important behavioral details: cost per call (5 credits), charged only on success, and chaining suggestion. No contradictions with annotations, and adds value beyond them.

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 well-structured with purpose first, then cost, chaining advice, and parameter list. It is not overly verbose, though the parameter list duplicates schema info. Every sentence adds value except perhaps minor repetition.

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 simplicity and the presence of annotations and full schema coverage, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers purpose, cost, usage guidance, and parameter listing. It does not describe return values, but no output schema exists and the openWorldHint suggests a flexible response.

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% and the description's parameter list essentially restates the schema descriptions. It does not add new meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states it finds professional email from Fullname, Company name, and LinkedIn Company URL. It is specific and matches the title, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like find_phone or find_gender, though the purpose is evident.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool, including chaining with search_companies if LinkedIn URL is unknown. Also instructs to announce total cost before calling and wait for confirmation, which is very helpful for an AI agent.

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