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

Annotations provide safety hints. The description adds valuable behavioral details: passages include character offsets, 'BGE-base-en embeddings + cosine over 500-char overlapping windows', a 200K char cap, and truncation flag. No contradictions 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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds distinct value: purpose, usage context, behavioral details, and technical specs.

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?

Given three parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description fully covers behavior, limitations, and use-case pairing. No evident gaps for agent invocation.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds context for 'text' (max chars), 'query' (examples), and 'limit' (range) but schema already covers these. Limited added value beyond schema.

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 'Semantic search INSIDE a fetched record', specifying the verb 'search' and the resource 'inside a record'. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning its pairing with 'ask_pipeworx_grounded' and implying use for large documents.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when the record is too big to cram into the prompt' and highlights benefits like saving context and returning only relevant passages. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use or provide direct alternatives, though the context is clear.

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