find

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

Explicitly states read-only and never writes. Describes retrieval technique, output format with fields and provenance. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden and does it well.

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?

Three sentences, no redundancy. Front-loaded with key attributes (read-only, hybrid search, return format). Efficient.

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?

Covers purpose, behavior, and output adequately. Lacks mention of default limit or error handling, but these are minor given schema coverage and tool simplicity.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in schema (100% coverage). Description adds context about retrieval but not per-parameter detail beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Describes exact verb (search) and resource (task store) with retrieval method (hybrid RRF). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool `similar`.

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?

Provides clear use case ('what do I have about X') and contrasts with `similar`. Could mention alternative for exact ID lookup but not necessary given direct sibling differentiation.

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