rag_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'RAG' which implies generation, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what the output format is, or any side effects (e.g., costs, latency). This is a significant gap for a query tool.

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 a single, concise sentence without wasted words. However, it is bare-bones and does not preface key details like scope or result format, so slightly more structure could improve usefulness without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain return values and usage context. It does neither. Given the complexity of RAG (with generation) and the existence of a similar sibling tool, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully select and invoke it correctly.

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 schema provides descriptions for all three parameters, giving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it relies on the baseline for high coverage. No additional semantic insight is offered.

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 action ('Perform RAG query') and the resource ('BambiSleep data'), making it distinct from generic queries. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'semantic_search', which could cause confusion about which to use.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like semantic_search, or when not to use it. The description simply states what it does without any contextual direction.

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