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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it confirms the tool stores a document, clarifies that embedding and retrieval are handled elsewhere, and implies an immediate write operation. No contradiction with 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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose: action, use cases, and storage detail.

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 add tool with fully described schema, the description is adequate. It explains storage and retrieval context, though it could mention duplicate handling or overwrite behavior.

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% with basic descriptions, but the description adds value by explaining the type of content expected (policies, FAQs, etc.) and that 'name' is a friendly title, which enriches the parameter semantics.

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 adds a free-form text document to the knowledge base, lists specific use cases (policies, FAQs, etc.), and distinguishes it from siblings like query, delete, and scrape tools.

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 provides clear examples of when to use the tool (pasted policies, FAQs, etc.) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like scrape_knowledge_url for web content.

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