cmdb_find_duplicates

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context with 'in-memory grouping', revealing that the tool scans a limited set and groups in memory rather than performing a database-level query. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys the action and method. No wasted words.

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 is simple with only optional parameters and read-only behavior. Given the annotations and full schema coverage, the description sufficiently covers the core purpose, though it doesn't describe the return format. It's still adequate for a basic discovery tool.

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), so the description adds minimal new info about parameters. It does imply match_fields with 'specified fields' and limit with 'in-memory', but the schema already covers these.

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 ('Find') and resource ('duplicate CIs'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like cmdb_find_orphans and cmdb_find_stale. The phrase 'by matching on specified fields' further clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 description gives a clear context (finding duplicates) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like search_cmdb_ci or cmdb_reconcile, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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