List Deduplication Suggestions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output-shape context (field names, confidence range, statuses), but it does not disclose behavioral details such as ordering, pagination, or whether the list is system-wide. This is adequate but not rich.

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 compact and front-loads the core purpose. The sentence 'Returns pairs of documents that may be duplicates...' partially overlaps with the subsequent 'Returns: JSON array...' line, creating slight redundancy, but overall it is clear and free of filler.

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?

With no output schema present, the description compensates by listing exact output fields, the confidence range, and status enum. It does not mention ordering or pagination, but for a zero-parameter read-only list operation the provided information is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately focuses on the output contract instead, which is the correct use of the text.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and names the resource ('duplicate document suggestions detected by the system'), and it enumerates the returned fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool ogarniai_get_document_duplicates, leaving some ambiguity about whether this is a global list or per-document.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ogarniai_get_document_duplicates. The description does not state the scope of the suggestions (all suggestions vs. those for a specific document) or mention workflow context, so an agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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