Find Decision Maker Email

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it uses API credits and returns a 'likely' decision maker with 'verified' email, providing some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not discuss rate limits or result reliability in depth.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. No unnecessary words; every part is informative.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description only mentions 'find a likely decision maker and verified email' without specifying return format or multiple results. Adequate for a simple lookup but missing some completeness for an agent relying on this description alone.

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 descriptions for both domain and category in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage details for the parameters beyond what is already in the schema.

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 action (find), the resource (decision maker and verified email), and the scope (for a domain). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like find_company_emails or find_person_email by focusing specifically on a decision maker.

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 mentions credit usage as a constraint but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no 'when not to use' or mention of other tools.

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