word_find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds useful behavioral detail: case-insensitive exact matching, the content of returned entries, and the 'possibly empty' result behavior, which is valuable beyond the annotations.

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 well-structured with clear sections for overview, usage, parameters, and returns. Every sentence contributes useful information, and the most important scoping and routing guidance is front-loaded. No filler or 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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is complete: it defines matching behavior, return contents, fallback routing, and empty-result semantics. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 schema already documents the `term` parameter. The description adds meaning by specifying that the match is exact and case-insensitive and that the term can be a word or phrase, which helps an agent know what input is valid.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search for a term by exact name (case-insensitive) in the ASD-STE100 Issue 9 vocabulary.' It also names the sibling it is not by saying to use `word_match` with a wildcard when this returns no items, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 instructs when to use the tool: 'Use this first when you know the exact word.' It also gives the alternative path: 'Use `word_match` with a wildcard if this tool returns no items.' This is clear routing guidance with no ambiguity.

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