Search mutual funds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful workflow fact that returned AMFI codes feed get_mutual_fund, but says nothing about result ordering, pagination or how the limit/plan/option filters affect matching.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the workflow hint is appended compactly rather than buried.

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 4-parameter read-only search with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose and downstream use adequately. The only gap is that it does not hint at what a result contains (scheme name, code, plan/option), which an agent might want.

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 100% and enums for plan and option are self-documenting, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no query syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema already states, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (Find) and resource (Indian mutual fund schemes and their AMFI scheme codes), and differentiates from the sibling get_mutual_fund by framing itself as the lookup step that feeds that tool. An agent can distinguish it from search_securities without opening either 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?

The parenthetical 'needed for get_mutual_fund' gives clear downstream context for when to reach for this tool, effectively positioning it as a prerequisite step. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming an alternative search path.

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