sb_api_find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior: it reaches all 892 operations and the id-mode returns a full call sheet with parameters, credential, body fields, and handler caveats — details not derivable from annotations or schema.

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?

One dense sentence that front-loads the two usage modes and packs in return-value content without waste. No filler, nothing duplicative.

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 compensates by summarizing what the call sheet contains. A read-only lookup with fully documented params is well covered; only minor gaps remain, such as pagination/limit behavior across 892 operations.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters (id, tag, limit, query). The description reinforces the query/id duality but adds no format, default, or constraint detail beyond the schema's own text, 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 (Find) and resource (API operations) and clarifies the two modes: intent search via query, or call sheet via id. It also declares scope ('reaches all 892 operations'), which implicitly separates it from an executor like sb_api_call, though no sibling is named 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?

The description tells the agent exactly which argument selects which behavior: use query to find by intent, use id to retrieve a call sheet. What is missing is guidance on when not to use this tool or when to prefer a sibling like sb_api_call or sb_catalog_search.

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