proximo_find_tools

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explains that this is a search-only operation (with no side effects implied), states that all terms must match, and describes the follow-up steps needed to actually invoke a result, adding useful workflow context beyond a simple search.

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 a clear first sentence, a highlighted exclusion block, and a workflow sentence. It is longer than a single sentence, but every part adds value; the style is efficient for the amount of guidance it delivers.

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 that an output schema exists, the description needn't repeat return details. It covers the workflow, when to use alternatives, and the 'all terms must match' constraint, but does not describe the limit parameter or clarify the '906 more tools' sentence, leaving minor gaps.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It only roughly covers the query parameter ('keyword', 'all terms must match') and never mentions the 'limit' parameter or its default, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 opens with 'Search Proximo's full tool catalog by keyword,' which clearly specifies the verb, resource, and method. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by directing estate-type questions to proximo_recall and naming the subsequent tools to call.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'if the question is what exists, how many, what changed, or when something last happened, call proximo_recall instead.' It also provides a clear workflow: search, then call proximo_tool_schema for arguments, then proximo_call to execute.

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