cmdb_find_stale

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which cover the safety profile. The description adds the 'still operational' filter and the time-based condition, but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or interpretation of 'operational.' With annotations present, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then clarifies the condition. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundancy.

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 read-only query tool with well-documented optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. It could benefit from addressing what 'operational' means or how results are ordered, but overall it is sufficient for a simple find operation.

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%—all three parameters (limit, ci_class, days_threshold) have descriptions, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds marginal value by implying the days_threshold concept, but does not enhance parameter understanding beyond 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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('CIs') with a clear condition ('not updated within a given number of days that are still operational'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cmdb_find_duplicates and cmdb_find_orphans by targeting stale but operational configuration items.

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?

Usage context is implied through the description—'find CIs not updated...' suggests when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives like cmdb_find_duplicates or cmdb_reconcile. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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