design.similar_site

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds rich context: embedding methods (DINOv2 vision, e5-base text), mean pooling, pgvector HNSW search, and RRF fusion with percentages, far exceeding annotation coverage.

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 bilingual and includes detailed technical steps, but it is well-structured with purpose first. Slightly verbose but still clear.

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 description thoroughly explains the search methodology and parameter constraints. However, it lacks explicit description of the return format or ranking, which would be helpful given no output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds crucial constraints: 'url must exist in web_pages' and explains 'include_details' as common patterns/differences, adding value beyond schema.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'similar website designs'. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'design.search_by_image' by specifying URL input and embedding technique.

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 parameter description for 'url' specifies it must exist in DB, but there is no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings. Usage guidance is minimal.

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