dictionary_synonyms

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It explains how max_senses and unsensed_limit interact, that unsensed candidates are grouped separately, that allocations must not exceed limit, and what count and candidate_count represent.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded and every subsequent sentence contributes a distinct piece of behavior or result semantics. No filler or redundancy.

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 a 7-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers the important parameter interactions and output counts, and the output schema can supply the remaining return-value details. Nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema, especially for sense_id and part_of_speech that lack schema descriptions, and for unsensed_limit and max_senses with richer allocation semantics than the schema's short descriptions.

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 first sentence uses a precise verb and resource: 'Find synonyms grouped by sense and part of speech.' This clearly separates dictionary_synonyms from siblings like dictionary_relations, dictionary_translate, and rhymes, and the grouping detail adds specificity beyond the name.

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 gives actionable context: pass a sense_id from dictionary_lookup when context matters, and unsensed results are only returned as explicit groups, with unsensed_limit=0 for strictly sense-scoped candidates. It does not explicitly compare against all sibling tools, but the context for how to invoke this tool is clear.

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