Find developments

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the sort semantics (velocity = 24h statements, size = window statements) which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about result volume, pagination, or rate limits.

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?

Four short clauses, all front-loaded: purpose first, then the sort semantics, then the symbol syntax. No filler sentences and nothing repeated from the schema.

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 7-parameter discovery tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and sorting but leaves pagination (cursor), result shape, and the relationship to sibling search tools unexplained. Adequate to make a call, incomplete for calling it well.

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 86%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema lacks: the sort enum values (recent/size/velocity) are undocumented in the schema and are explained here, and the comma-separated OR behavior for symbol is clarified. It omits the 'oldest' sort value and says nothing about limit, cursor, or min_statements.

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 ('List') and resource ('developments') with the three scoping axes (symbol, sector, theme). It does not differentiate itself from the sibling get_topic, which reads like the singular counterpart, so an agent cannot fully disambiguate from the description alone.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool versus search_statements, trending, or get_topic, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The sort explanations describe behavior of the call, not when the call is the right choice.

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