openemis_discover

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool searches by name, summary, and description, but does not clarify read-only status, pagination, result format, or behavior when no matches found. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, each serving a distinct purpose: first states the core function, second adds detail on search method. No superfluous words. Front-loaded with the verb and resource. Excellent 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the primary action and search scope. However, it would benefit from mentioning expected return format or that it returns a list of matching items. Still, it is adequate for straightforward use.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a detailed description for 'topic' including examples. The tool description adds meaning by explaining that searches cover domains, families, and playbooks, which is beyond the schema. This helps the agent understand the scope of the search.

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 discovers endpoints and playbooks related to a topic, searching by name, summary, and description. It distinguishes from siblings like openemis_list_domains and openemis_list_playbooks by focusing on cross-type search rather than listing all. The verb 'discover' combined with specific resources makes purpose unambiguous.

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 implies use for topic-based discovery across multiple resources but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like openemis_list_domains or openemis_get. It lacks 'use this when' or 'instead of' guidance, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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