Find anything

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and description aligns by mentioning 'get ranked candidates' and 'grab an ID'. The description adds behavioral context: it returns ranked results across multiple entity types. However, it could detail ranking criteria or pagination. 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?

Three sentences: first defines purpose, second explains how it works, third gives usage context. No redundant words. Front-loaded with key concept 'Universal name resolver'. Each 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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers purpose, input params, and usage scenario. It distinguishes from many sibling tools. Could mention response format or ranking hint, but overall complete for a simple lookup tool.

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 has 100% description coverage, providing meaning for all parameters. The description reinforces 'name fragment' for query and mentions 'channels, roles, members' aligning with types. It adds minimal extra value beyond schema (e.g., 'Omit to use the default guild' for guild). 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 clearly states it is a 'Universal name resolver' that takes a name fragment and returns ranked candidates across channels, roles, and members with IDs. It differentiates from siblings like 'search_members' by being a general fuzzy lookup, as indicated by 'Use this when unsure what an entity is called or to grab an ID once and reuse it.'

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 states when to use: 'when unsure what an entity is called or to grab an ID once and reuse it.' Implies not to use when exact name/ID is known or for specific filtered searches. Contrasts with siblings like 'search_members' or 'list_channels' by offering a broad search across entity types.

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