Find Subscriber by Name

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description does not need to restate that this is a read operation. The description adds that matching subscribers and their IDs are returned, but it does not disclose match semantics, result limits, pagination, or exact-vs-partial matching behavior.

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 description is two short, focused sentences. It front-loads the action and immediately specifies what the caller gets back, with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary schema duplication.

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 one-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description provides enough information to call the tool and understand the high-level result. It could be more complete by clarifying exact-match versus partial-match behavior and any result limits, but those gaps are relatively minor given the tool's 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?

The schema already fully documents the single 'name' parameter with type, minLength, and a description. The tool description's 'by name' only restates what the schema already says, adding no new parameter-level meaning.

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 ('search') and resource ('subscribers') and clearly states the search criterion ('by name') along with the key result (matching subscriber IDs). It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like manychat_get_subscriber or manychat_find_by_field, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. An agent must infer from the tool name and sibling names that this is the name-based search option.

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