agentlens_discover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that results are ranked with trust scores, estimated cost, and latency. It implies a read-only operation with no side effects, and the fixed action parameter reinforces this. While it could mention permissions or rate limits, for a discovery tool this is adequate.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an example. It uses a header to highlight when to use, and the example is clear and labeled. No redundant information.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the purpose, usage context, and return type (ranked results with scores, cost, latency). It does not detail the output structure, but the mention of fields provides a sufficient mental model. For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is fairly 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it only provides an example call. The example is helpful but not essential for understanding parameter semantics.

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 it discovers agent capabilities in the network, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like agentlens_agents (list all) and agentlens_delegate (delegate tasks) by focusing on discovery based on task type.

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 explicitly says when to use: before delegating, to find agents for a specific task type. It also lists what it returns (ranked results with trust scores, cost, latency). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives, which would elevate it to a 5.

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