service_finder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: cost ($0.005 USDC per call), latency p99 3000ms, daily index refresh, ranking signals (text match, repeat purchases, reachability), the max-3-per-provider cap, no boost for agentsvc.io, and what 'reachable' means (answered our own check with a valid 402). This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

Dense single paragraph, but front-loaded with the purpose and every sentence adds information (scope, outputs, ranking, filters, cost). A bulleted breakdown would improve scanability, and some clauses are packed tight, but there is little waste.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description enumerates the returned fields (provider, URL, method, price, networks, input hint, reachable, checked_at, response time) and the ranking behavior. For a 5-parameter search tool this is complete enough to call 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 80%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains the reachability concept behind include_unreachable, confirms task is free-text intent, and ties max_price_usd and network to the filtering behavior. This goes beyond the schema's own parameter docs.

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 (find the right paid API for a task) and an explicit scope ('across the whole x402 market, not only agentsvc.io'). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling lookup tools like web_search or product_lookup because it searches a curated market of x402 endpoints.

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?

Gives concrete usage examples ('convert a web page to markdown', 'token price on Solana') and the condition that selects the tool (you need a paid API for a task). It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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