find_trusted

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return structure (agents with Laddoo score, tier, review URL), ranking by trust, and minimum tier filtering. This adequately informs an agent about behavior, though it could mention ordering direction or pagination.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence states core purpose and output; second sentence gives usage switch. Information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, input semantics, output structure, and sibling distinctions comprehensively. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly.

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%, providing good baseline. The description adds context beyond schema: 'ranked by trust' and 'matching a free-text need' complement the need parameter. The min_tier default and enumeration are clear. Slight extra value justifies 4.

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 the verb 'discover' (find) and the resource 'Hlido-reviewed agents' matched by free-text need. It explicitly differentiates from siblings find_similar_agents (semantic task-matching) and recommend (structured filters), making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('keyword/need-based discovery') and when to prefer alternatives ('semantic task-matching prefer find_similar_agents, structured filters prefer recommend'). This helps an agent select the correct tool.

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