Look up functions by address or name

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and an output schema exists so return-shape detail is unnecessary. The description's one contribution is that address-vs-name detection is automatic, which is modest added context beyond the annotations.

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 or repetition. It is arguably too terse for the crowded sibling namespace, but every word present earns its place.

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 simple read lookup with full schema coverage, an output schema, and a readOnly annotation, the basics are covered. The notable gap is that with 40+ siblings containing func_query, list_funcs, and entity_query, the description never clarifies the boundary, which is the main thing an agent needs here.

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 both parameters (queries, instance_id) are already documented in the schema, including the anyOf array-or-string shape and the instance fallback behavior. The description's 'address or name' phrasing merely echoes the queries param, 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 and resource ('Get functions') plus the two accepted key types (address or name), which is clear. However, it does not distinguish this tool from near-neighbors like func_query, list_funcs, or entity_query, leaving the agent to guess which lookup surface applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusion of alternatives, and no statement of when func_query or list_funcs would be preferable. The parenthetical 'auto-detects' hints at input handling but not at tool selection.

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