find_dataflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states search by id or name, but does not disclose return behavior, pagination, limit semantics, or what happens with an empty search. The minimal wording gives little beyond the basic operation.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It is suitably front-loaded with the action and target. However, it could be slightly expanded to include useful behavioral or parameter details without losing conciseness.

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?

With three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits return value details, limit semantics, and usage context. An agent would need to infer how to invoke the tool correctly, especially around the optional parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'provider' scopes the search and that 'search' matches by id or name, but it does not explain the 'limit' parameter, default behavior, or search format (exact vs partial). This leaves significant parameter ambiguity.

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 and object: 'Search a provider's dataflows by id or name.' This clearly indicates the tool's function and differentiates it from siblings by the resource type. It does not explicitly distinguish from search_codes, but 'dataflows' is a distinct enough resource.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like search_codes or describe_flow. The description implies that it is used for searching dataflows, but it provides no explicit context, exclusions, or conditions.

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