find_silent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies the read-only nature ('find') and the concept of 'silent', but it doesn't disclose any additional behavioral details such as pagination, sorting, or handling of topics with no data.

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 overall, with the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence's example is helpful but not strictly necessary, slightly reducing conciseness.

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 (2 optional params, output schema present), the description is adequate. It explains the main concept and gives a use case, but could mention whether the tool considers only topics with a previous history.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It explains still_seit_stunden ('X hours'), but does not describe the limit parameter. Thus, the description only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states the tool's function precisely: it finds topics that have not reported for X hours. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_topics (all topics) and get_last (last reports).

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 a concrete use-case example ('since when has this plug not reported?'), implying when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the example clarifies the context.

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