find_widget

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

In the absence of annotations, the description indicates the tool returns up to 20 matches and includes sys_ids, implying it is a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state non-destructiveness, pagination behavior, or handling of no results.

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?

Two concise sentences with no extraneous information. The most important information (what it searches, return value) is front-loaded.

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 search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the search criteria, return value, and limit. It could mention behavior for no results or exceeding 20 matches, but is largely 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 50% (keyword described, limit not). The description adds value by clarifying that keyword can search name, ID, or description, and implies the limit parameter through 'up to 20 matches', but does not fully explain limit's behavior.

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?

Clearly states the tool searches for Service Portal widgets by name, ID, or keyword and returns up to 20 matches with sys_ids. Distinguishes from sibling tools like clone_widget and update_widget, which perform different actions.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use the tool (searching widgets by various criteria) but does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools. Provides clear context for usage.

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