beacon_discover

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that agents can join the network but omits critical details: whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or any side effects. The agent cannot infer safety or cost.

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?

Three short sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, return scope, filtering guidance, and examples. No extraneous text. Well front-loaded with the core action.

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 presence of an output schema (so return values are covered) and no annotations, the description covers what the tool does and how to filter. However, it lacks mention of pagination, result limits, or read-only nature, leaving some contextual gaps for a listing tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, placing baseline at 3. The description adds context about 'native + relay' and examples of agents, but the filtering guidance essentially mirrors the schema's parameter descriptions. No substantial extra semantics beyond 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 clearly identifies the tool as discovering AI agents on the Beacon network, with a specific verb ('discover') and resource ('AI agents'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on listing all agents, while sibling tools handle status, chat, contracts, etc. Examples of agent types add clarity.

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 explains when to use filters (by provider or capability) and states the tool returns all registered agents. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or point to alternatives like beacon_agent_status for single-agent queries.

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