jaeger_find_test_traces

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'Accepts any tag key-value schema without normalization' indicates flexibility and a lack of preprocessing, while 'searches all known services concurrently (capped at 20)' and 'sorted newest-first' disclose performance and ordering traits. These enrich the annotation-provided readOnly and idempotent hints without contradiction.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and uses three clear sentences. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, tag flexibility, and key behaviors.

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 schema, annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects. It lacks explicit differentiation from the similarly named 'jaeger_search_traces', which could cause selection ambiguity, but is otherwise complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context (e.g., tag schema flexibility, service omission behavior) but does not significantly deepen understanding of individual parameters beyond the schema. It is adequate, not outstanding.

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 'Find Jaeger traces matching the supplied tag query', which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'jaeger_search_traces', which may serve a similar purpose.

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 clear context on when to use it (tag-based query, any tag schema) and notes that service is optional with a fallback to all services. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer use cases.

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