find_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions 'fuzzy-search' and 'candidate shortlist' to set expectations about approximate matching and limited results, but does not detail rate limits, authentication, or exact result ranking behavior.

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 sentences with no redundant information, front-loading the core purpose. Every word earns its place, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 fuzzy search tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, usage, and expected behavior. It adequately informs the agent when to invoke it.

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 single parameter 'query' has 0% schema coverage, but the description adds meaning by specifying it's a name or alias. This provides sufficient context for the agent to understand what to input, though additional format details would be helpful.

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 performs a fuzzy search of the entity registry by name/alias, returning a shortlist. It distinguishes itself effectively from sibling tools like get_entity and list_entities by specifying the search behavior and candidate nature.

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 explicit use cases: checking existence before creation and recalling information. While it doesn't exclude alternatives directly, the context implies this is for fuzzy name matching, which is sufficient guidance.

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