find_entity

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

While annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the description adds the case-insensitive substring match behavior and the purpose of ID resolution. However, it does not detail the exact output (e.g., list of matches, what fields are returned) or mention potential edge cases like multiple results or empty results.

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 are concise and front-loaded with the core purpose and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without 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 lack of output schema, the description should cover what the tool returns (e.g., list of entities with IDs). It mentions 'turn a human-readable name into an id' but does not explicitly describe the output structure or any pagination/limits. This gap reduces completeness.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, all three parameters are described in the schema. The description adds the 'case-insensitive substring match' context for the query and clarifies that entity_type defaults to 'any'. This adds value 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 clearly states the tool finds campaigns, ad groups, or ads by name via case-insensitive substring match, and distinguishes it from sibling tools that require an ID.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (to convert human-readable name to ID) and when not to (when ID already known), and directs to preferred alternatives like get_campaign, get_ad_group, or get_ad.

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