Find a builder's id/address by name

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: case-insensitive matching across id/name/address, exact-then-substring ordering, and revenue-based ranking. It stops short of describing error behavior or empty-result handling, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the workflow, then matching rules, then the return shape. Dense but every sentence carries information; the field enumeration is slightly list-like but earns its place given no output schema.

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, and the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (id, name, category, address, revenue/volume windows, total_users). Combined with the matching and routing guidance, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this 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 100%, so the schema documents both parameters (baseline 3). The description still adds semantics the schema lacks: what `query` matches against (id, name, address), the case-insensitivity, and the substring allowance, which materially informs query construction.

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 precise verb+resource: resolving a builder name to id/address. It also explicitly separates itself from siblings by naming flowscan_builder_revenue and flowscan_builder_dashboard as downstream consumers, so an agent can place it without opening a schema.

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 explicit ordering ('call this first, then pass the exact id/address to ...'), names the two alternative tools, and gives a decision rule for ambiguity ('if multiple strong matches exist, show them to the user'). Nothing is left to inference.

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