find_spring_sizes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It doesn't state whether this is read-only, whether it returns a list or a single entry, how multiple filter parameters combine (AND/OR), or the role of the limit parameter for pagination. The description only says 'find' without disclosing any behavioral details.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action. It is appropriately concise with no wasted words 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?

Given 14 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely under-specified. It doesn't explain return format, pagination via limit, parameter semantics, or relationship to sibling tools. An agent would need to infer too much to call this tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions 'type, size, class, tag' but doesn't map these to specific schema fields like spring_type, load_class, or the various dimension parameters. It adds minimal value over the raw schema, which itself has no descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool finds spring catalog entries and mentions filter criteria (type, size, class, tag). It distinguishes from sibling tools like recommend_spring_sizes by implying a direct lookup rather than a recommendation. However, 'size' and 'class' are vague and could map to multiple parameters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like recommend_spring_sizes or resolve_spring_size. The description doesn't mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions for selection, leaving the agent to guess which tool fits a given request.

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