midnight-suggest-tool

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe and idempotent behavior. The description adds context by stating it 'matches your intent against known patterns' and returns recommendations with confidence levels. No contradiction with 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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with the key purpose. It uses emojis for clarity, presents examples in a structured list, and includes a separate usage guidance section. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, idempotent), the description is complete. It explains the tool's function, usage patterns, and expected output (recommendations with confidence levels). An output schema exists, so return values are covered.

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 100% with one parameter 'intent' described as 'What you want to accomplish (natural language description)'. The description goes beyond by providing examples of phrasing intents, which adds practical semantic guidance for the user.

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's purpose: natural language intent matching to recommend tools. It uses a specific verb phrase 'SMART DISCOVERY' and distinguishes from sibling tools by providing examples that map intents to specific sibling tools, thus clarifying its role as a suggestion 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 includes explicit usage guidance: 'Call once with your intent - no need to call repeatedly', 'More specific intents get better matches', and 'Use the primaryRecommendation for the best match'. It also gives examples of when to use sibling tools directly, providing clear when-to-use and alternatives.

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