petstore-api.findPetsByStatus

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds no behavior beyond that. It doesn't mention response format, pagination, or any constraints. The description is minimal and adds little.

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 extremely concise—five words—with no filler. It is clear and front-loaded, achieving maximum brevity.

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?

The description is too terse for a tool that appears to filter by a parameter that is not present in the schema. The mention of 'status' without a corresponding parameter leaves significant ambiguity, and there is no information about expected input or output beyond what a generic find operation might do.

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?

The schema has zero parameters, yet the description mentions 'by status'. This implies a status filter that isn't defined, creating an inconsistency. No semantic guidance is provided for parameters.

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 'Finds Pets by status' clearly states the action (find) and resource (pets) with a specific filter (status). However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like findPetsByTags beyond the filter criterion, and the lack of a status parameter in the schema makes the statement ambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like findPetsByTags or getPetById. The description provides no context for selection or exclusions.

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