find_duplicates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds non-obvious behavioral detail: the exact duplicate-matching strategy (DOI match plus >85% title similarity) and optional collection scoping, which annotations cannot convey.

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: one states the action and method, the next gives use cases and optional scope. No filler or duplication of schema/annotations; every clause earns its place.

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 has only two optional parameters with defaults in the schema, a full safety profile from annotations, and an output schema. The description supplies the remaining needed context: purpose, matching criteria, typical triggers, and collection scoping. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It paraphrases collection_key ('Optionally scoped to a single collection') but never explains limit, including what its value represents or how the string/integer variants are interpreted. With half the parameters undocumented in both schema and description, this is a clear gap.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Scan'), a concrete resource ('the Zotero library'), and the goal ('duplicate items'), plus the method (DOI match and title similarity >85%). This is clearly distinct from siblings like search_items or get_collection_items, which serve different lookup tasks.

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?

It explicitly states when to use it: when the user wants to clean up a library or after bulk imports. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the use-case context is clear enough to route an agent.

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