Find a texture atlas element

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important return values and explains the atlas concept, but it omits behavioral details such as how search matching works (substring vs exact), whether results are limited by the limit parameter, sorting, or error conditions. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 three sentences, with the main action front-loaded, followed by return values and a usage preference. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, return values, and usage preference. It is missing explanation of the limit parameter and result limit behavior, but given the tool's simplicity, it is largely 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 only 50% (query is described, limit is not). The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond implying the query is the atlas name fragment. It does not explain the limit parameter's function or default behavior, leaving a gap that the description doesn't compensate for.

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 searches named texture atlas elements used with SetAtlas, distinguishing it from sibling search tools (e.g., wow_icon_search, wow_file_search). It also lists specific return values (dimensions, FileDataID, exact SetAtlas call), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance to prefer atlases over raw texture paths for UI art, which is a clear usage directive. However, it doesn't name specific sibling tools as alternatives or state when NOT to use this tool, so it falls slightly short of full exclusionary guidance.

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