findpulse

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

No annotations provided, so description carries transparency burden. It discloses pricing per endpoint and global coverage, but missing details on rate limits, authentication, side effects, or return formats. The pricing info is helpful for cost-conscious agents.

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?

Description is lengthy with pricing embedded in bullet points. It front-loads the main purpose but includes many details that could be streamlined. Structure is acceptable but not optimally concise.

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?

With 16 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should map parameters to endpoints or provide usage examples. It fails to guide which parameters are relevant for each action, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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% but descriptions are minimal (often just parameter names). The description adds value by documenting the 'action' parameter as an enum of endpoints, clarifying its function. For other parameters, it provides no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Universal finder and discovery API' and lists multiple endpoints with their specific purposes (e.g., 'Best product for use case', 'Cheaper alternatives'). It distinguishes itself from specialized sibling tools by covering a broad range of searches, though not explicitly naming siblings.

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 outlines endpoints and their use cases, providing implicit guidance on when to use each. However, it lacks explicit direction on when to prefer findpulse over sibling tools or what factors to consider for endpoint selection.

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