find_patterns_for_task

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. Discloses grouping behavior and verbosity effect (compact vs full), but does not mention behavior on empty results, error handling, or performance expectations. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, includes example and usage advice. No redundant information, every sentence 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?

Given 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, description covers main purpose and two parameters. Lacks mention of limit parameter, return format details, and error scenarios. Acceptable for simple search tool but leaves gaps.

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%, so description must compensate. Explains task parameter with example, and verbosity parameter with default and options. Does not explain limit parameter (integer 1-25). Adds value for two of three parameters but misses one.

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?

Clearly states verb (return), resource (patterns grouped by suite), and input (natural-language task description). Distinguishes from sibling tools like search_patterns and get_requirement by specifying it's a starting point for cross-cutting design questions.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this as a starting point and follow up with get_requirement for specific pattern_ids. Also mentions verbosity defaults for cheap triage vs full for detailed output. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios, but context is clear.

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