find_duplicates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the query action and the min_appearances default, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how db_path affects execution, whether any data is modified, or the grouping/ordering of results.

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 description is extremely concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the purpose, and the Args section succinctly documents the one non-obvious parameter with its default, with zero wasted words.

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 two-parameter read query with an output schema, the description is mostly adequate, but the db_path parameter is entirely unexplained, and no context is given about the scope of the scan or any constraints. This leaves a notable gap for an agent deciding whether to supply db_path.

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 meaningful semantics for min_appearances, explaining the minimum playlist count and the default value. However, db_path is never mentioned, and with 0% schema description coverage, its meaning remains opaque despite the schema's 'Db Path' title.

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 opens with the specific verb 'Find' and resource 'videos that appear in multiple playlists,' clearly identifying the duplicate-detection purpose. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like find_dead_videos and find_empty_playlists by focusing on cross-playlist duplicates.

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 clearly frames the tool's use case: detecting videos that appear in multiple playlists. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool guidance, but the context is clear and no exclusions are needed for this focused query.

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