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

Annotations already declare safe, read-only behavior. Description adds critical behavioral details: BGE-base-en embeddings, cosine similarity over 500-char overlapping windows, 200K char limit with truncation flagging. These go well beyond 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 focused sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds critical information: use case, pairing, technical details. Highly efficient.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explicitly states return values (top-N passages, character offsets, similarity scores) and cap behavior. Complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. Description adds value by providing example queries for the query parameter and noting the character limit for the text parameter. Moderately enriches schema information.

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' with concrete examples (SEC 10-K body, article). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning pairing with 'ask_pipeworx_grounded' and emphasizes saving context by returning only relevant passages.

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 advises use when 'the record is too big to cram into the prompt' and highlights pairing with ask_pipeworx_grounded. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but provides clear context for appropriate use.

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