find_connections

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions 'keyword matching' and three specific tables but lacks detail on result format, sorting, or potential side effects. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Short description with main purpose front-loaded. Parameter list is clear. No extraneous information. Could be slightly more structured but effective.

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 multiple sources and output schema existence, description misses details like deduplication, result ordering, or how connections are scored. Output schema may compensate but description incomplete on its own.

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?

Description adds meaning to both parameters beyond schema: 'content' is 'text snippet to find connections for', 'limit' is 'maximum results per source'. Schema only provides types and default, so description adds value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search library, meetings, and news for items related to given text', specifying verb 'search' and distinct resources. It distinguishes from siblings like search_library by covering multiple sources.

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?

Implied usage for cross-source search but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like search_library or search_literature. No exclusion criteria mentioned.

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