find

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it is safe. The description merely restates what a find query is, without adding specifics like pagination behavior, permission requirements, or response format.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is immediately clear and front-loaded, containing the essential action and target.

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 the rich input schema (100% parameter coverage), output schema, and annotations, the one-line description is minimally viable but lacks contextual guidance. It does not mention default limit, filtering capability, or relationship to other query tools, so an agent must rely entirely on schemas and sibling context.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the schema carries the semantic load. The tool description itself does not elaborate on any parameters. Baseline 3 applies because the schema is comprehensive and the description adds no extra parameter context.

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 'Run a find query against a MongoDB collection' states a specific verb ('run'), resource ('MongoDB collection'), and operation ('find query'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like count and aggregate, which serve different retrieval purposes.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for retrieving documents, nor does it point to siblings like aggregate or count for other query types. Usage context is entirely implicit and left to the agent.

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