find_tile

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses read-only behavior, the three data sources covered (default tilesets, .txt sidecars, data/tilecatalog/), the `source` values, and the meaning of `matchedIn` and `transparent`. It stops short of stating permissions or pagination/limit behavior, which is the only gap.

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?

Front-loads the core match semantics before any of the detail, and each sentence carries new information. The dense parenthetical enumerating return fields is a little list-like, keeping it from a 5, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and their meanings, and by covering the catalog source model. An agent has everything it needs to call this correctly and interpret the result.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond it: it explains that `searchDescriptions: true` only widens the search over custom sheets because built-in RPG Maker entries carry no description, and it reinforces the literal-substring semantics of `query`.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (find tiles in a tileset) plus the exact matching semantics ('case-insensitive SUBSTRING match on catalog name'). Clearly distinguishes itself from the nearest siblings, get_tile_catalog (browse) and describe_tile (inspect one tile).

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 tells the agent when to use this (name fragment → tile id) and when not to rely on it (it is literal substring, not synonym/semantic search, with a concrete 'water' counter-example). It also names the alternative workflow: browse with get_tile_catalog + `sheet` filter, then search a fragment you saw.

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