fetcher-discover

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about what the discovery reveals (path params, required headers like organizationId/productName, body shapes, supported operations), going beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides immediate usage guidance and concrete examples. Every phrase earns its place.

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 discovery tool with 5 schema-covered parameters and strong annotations, the description is sufficiently complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, and what kinds of information it surfaces. It does not describe return format, but no output schema exists and the discovery nature makes the return value implicit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters. The description adds contextual examples of what to inspect (e.g., organizationId/productName headers) but does not add per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Discover') and names the exact resource scope ('Fetcher manager resources, actions, and execution contracts'). It clearly differentiates from fetcher-execute by framing this as an inspection/discovery tool rather than an execution tool.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use this before fetcher-execute') and what to inspect (path params, headers, body shapes, supported operations). It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use scenarios or name alternative discovery tools, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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