find_instances

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'search' without mentioning whether it is recursive, what the return format is, how maxResults affects results, or if it is a read-only operation. This is insufficient for an agent to predict side effects or output nature.

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, direct sentence that front-loads the core purpose. No redundant or irrelevant information is present, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits critical context such as the return structure, pagination behavior (despite maxResults being in the schema), search root scope, and the fact that no parameters are required. The agent lacks essential information to correctly invoke and interpret results.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage). The description merely echoes className and namePattern without adding extra semantic meaning, so it adds no value beyond the schema, but the schema itself is rich enough.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' and clearly identifies the resource 'instances', with explicit mention of filtering by className and/or name pattern. This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_children and get_descendants, which are simple listing operations.

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 implies usage for instance search by class/name pattern but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like get_descendants or get_children. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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