get_alternatives

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions results are 'ranked' (ordering behavior) but fails to explain what 'AN Score' represents, what constitutes an 'alternative service', error handling (e.g., invalid slug), or whether results are paginated.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and efficient with no redundant words. However, the opaque 'AN Score' acronym detracts from clarity—without explanation, it creates ambiguity rather than 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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with comprehensive schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, the unexplained 'AN Score' metric and lack of output format description (textual or schema) leave gaps given the absence of annotations.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the 'slug' parameter adequately described as 'Service slug to find alternatives for'. The description does not add syntax details, format examples, or semantic constraints beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 uses a specific verb (Find) and resource (alternative services), and specifies the ranking criteria (AN Score). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_score', and 'AN Score' is undefined jargon that may confuse the agent.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_score' or 'find_tools'. There are no stated prerequisites, conditions, or explicit exclusion criteria.

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