Find producers

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the workflow link (the returned id is the value other tools expect) but says nothing about result behavior such as empty result sets, multiple matches, or ordering.

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, no filler: the first defines what is found and why, the second states exactly how the output feeds sibling tools. The purpose is front-loaded before the integration detail.

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 no output schema, the description correctly carries the key return information (a producer id) and its downstream use. Minor gaps remain around match ambiguity and empty results, but nothing critical to calling it is missing.

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 100%, and the schema already documents both query (partial name, Persian or English, with an example) and limit (1-50, default 20). The description adds no meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (find producers/suppliers on the exchange by name) plus the concrete outcome (get the producer id). It also implicitly separates itself from siblings by declaring itself the id-lookup step rather than a data-fetch step.

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 frames usage as a prerequisite step for ime_trades, ime_supply and ime_price_history, so the agent knows to call this first and pass the id along. It stops short of stating failure or no-match handling or when another lookup tool (e.g. ime_securities) would be preferred.

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