find_token_by_color

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose that matching is on an 'exact' color, ruling out fuzzy/nearest-match behavior, and 'token(s)' signals the result may be plural. It does not state that the operation is read-only or how malformed hex input is handled. Output schema exists, so return-format disclosure is not required.

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?

A single sentence with the key qualifier ('reverse lookup', 'exact hex') front-loaded and no wasted words. It is terse to the point of omitting format detail, but structurally sound.

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?

Output schema covers return values, and plural results are hinted at, so the definition is adequate for a simple lookup. However, with no annotations and no schema parameter description, the accepted hex format and the read-only nature are left undocumented.

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 0% and there is one parameter, so the description must compensate. It adds that the value is a hex color and that matching is exact, but does not specify the accepted format (leading '#', case sensitivity, 3- vs 6-digit shorthand), leaving a real gap for the only input.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (token), plus 'reverse lookup' clarifies the direction of the query relative to a normal color lookup. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling list_tokens, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

'Reverse lookup' hints at when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusion of alternatives such as list_tokens, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer the routing condition.

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