vector_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral context. It mentions the tool returns 'vector search results dictionary from Typesense or an error message string' but doesn't describe pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what constitutes a successful versus failed search. For a complex search tool with 7 parameters, this is inadequate disclosure.

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 well-structured with clear sections for Args and Returns. Each parameter gets its own line with helpful explanations. While comprehensive, it's appropriately sized for a tool with 7 parameters. The opening sentence clearly states the purpose, though some parameter explanations could be slightly more concise.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description provides good parameter documentation but lacks sufficient behavioral context. It doesn't explain what the search results look like, error conditions, or performance characteristics. The parameter coverage is excellent, but overall completeness suffers from missing operational guidance.

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?

The description provides excellent parameter semantics despite 0% schema description coverage. It explains each parameter's purpose, format requirements (especially for 'vector_query'), default values, and usage context. The 'vector_query' format specification is particularly valuable, and optional parameters are clearly marked with their behaviors. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 tool 'performs a vector similarity search on a specific collection', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling 'search' by specifying 'vector similarity' search, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other search methods beyond mentioning hybrid search capabilities in parameters.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the sibling 'search' tool. It mentions hybrid search capabilities through the 'query_by' parameter but doesn't explain when vector search is preferred over text search or combined approaches. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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