find_object

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what happens when no object is found, whether matching is exact or partial, how multiple criteria are combined, or what the return value is. The behavior beyond the basic search action is undisclosed.

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 with the core action and criteria front-loaded. It contains no filler, though it could be slightly longer to cover missing behavioral details without becoming bloated.

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?

There is no output schema, no annotations, and no mention of return values, error behavior, or matching semantics. For a tool with four optional parameters and many closely related siblings, this description leaves significant gaps that an agent would need to resolve before calling it confidently.

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 provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description's mention of searching 'by name, title, or test object type' does add meaning for three of the four parameters. However, session_id is not explained, and the description does not clarify how the optional parameters interact when multiple are supplied.

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 states a specific verb ('find') and resource ('object in the active UI hierarchy'), and lists the search criteria (name, title, test object type). It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_objects or get_object.

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 given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as search_objects, get_object, or wait_object. The phrase 'active UI hierarchy' implies current-session scope, but there are no exclusions, preconditions, or alternative routing.

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