find_teams

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation via filters and return structure. However, it lacks disclosure of authentication requirements, access scope (e.g., does it return all teams or only visible ones?), rate limits, or error handling. The return format is partially given, but pagination is not mentioned beyond a limit parameter.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured. Two short paragraphs: first introduces the tool and uses bullet points for parameters, second describes return value. Every sentence adds value, no 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description covers the return structure adequately. It lists key fields. However, it omits context like error cases, what happens with invalid parameters, or whether results are sorted. For a search tool, these gaps slightly impact completeness but are not critical.

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 0%, so description fully compensates. Each parameter is clearly explained: status with explicit allowed values and shorthand 'open' definition, naics with format and matching rule, target_opp_id with purpose, limit with range and default. This adds essential meaning the schema lacks.

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?

Description clearly states 'Discover pursuit teams' and lists filters. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'find_my_teams' or 'get_teams_for_opp', which could confuse the agent. The mention of general-purpose filters implies broader search but lacks direct sibling contrast.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not indicate that 'find_my_teams' might be better for user-specific teams or 'get_teams_for_opp' for opportunity-specific queries. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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