load_instrument_by_name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the composite nature and 'first loadable match' but omits failure behavior (e.g., no match, load failure) and side effects. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 extremely concise with two sentences and a parameter list. All information is front-loaded and necessary, with no wasted words.

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?

The description covers the composite behavior and all parameters, but lacks details on return values or error states. Given the tool's action-oriented nature and no output schema, this is reasonably complete.

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 0%, but the description text clearly defines each parameter's meaning, including the default for 'category'. This adds significant value beyond the raw schema, though it could be more detailed.

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 the tool is a convenience composite that searches the browser by name and loads the first loadable match onto a given track. It explicitly differentiates from siblings like 'search_browser' and 'load_browser_item' by indicating it combines them.

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 explains the tool is a composite of two others, implying it should be used when a single step search-and-load is desired. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the context from sibling tools provides good guidance.

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