trawl_prompts_find

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say how local and live results are merged or de-duplicated, whether the live call has latency/failure/rate-limit implications, or what the response looks like.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the differentiating detail (local + live) comes first. It is efficient, though its terseness leaves gaps that the conciseness score itself should not penalize.

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 search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain result shape, ranking/merge behavior, and failure modes of the live component. None of that is present, leaving an agent unable to predict what it gets back or how costly the call is.

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%, so every parameter (type enum values, query, top_k default and max) is already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter meaning such as matching semantics or how top_k applies across the two sources, so 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 (Find) and resource (prompts) and adds the key distinguishing trait that it merges a local index with a live API search. This implicitly separates it from trawl_prompts_search_live, though it never names that sibling or states the relationship explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: because it combines local and live sources, an agent can infer it is the broadest prompt-search option. There is no explicit 'use this when...' or 'use trawl_prompts_search_live instead when...' guidance, despite several plausible alternatives in the sibling list.

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