find-matter

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

The description discloses that the tool returns the best match or not_found, which is critical behavioral context. Since no annotations are provided, this is the sole source of behavior, and it adequately covers the return behavior for a simple lookup.

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 three terse sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose, behavior, and alternative. No waste, and it's front-loaded with the primary action.

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 simple lookup tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers the action, the return value, and the alternative. It also implicitly signals a read-only, non-destructive operation.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds the key 'exact' matching semantics and clarifies the relationship between the 'by' enum and the 'value' parameter. This goes slightly beyond the schema's terse 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 a single matter by exact email, phone, or name, and explicitly distinguishes it from list-matters for fuzzy searches. The verb 'find' and the resource 'matter' are specific, and the scope (single, exact) is defined.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool (exact single lookup) and when to use the alternative list-matters with ilike and wildcards for fuzzy or multi-result searches. This provides clear usage boundaries.

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