find_similar

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

Discloses algorithmic behavior: uses semantic embeddings with TF-IDF fallback. With no annotations, this provides meaningful context. Does not cover potential side effects or limitations, but sufficient for a read-only search 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?

Two sentences, no redundant words. Purpose is front-loaded, algorithm explanation is concise, and use case is stated efficiently.

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?

No output schema; description does not mention return format or data structure. However, the tool is straightforward and the algorithm details provide adequate context for an agent to understand its behavior.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'Find documents similar to a given document' with verb and resource. Contrasts with siblings like semantic_search by mentioning the algorithmic approach (embeddings/TF-IDF).

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?

Implies usage for 'discovering related content' but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like semantic_search or fuzzy_search. No exclusions or when-not-to-use mentioned.

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