vector_find_faces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that Vector will 'actively search,' but does not say whether this is blocking, how long it lasts, whether it interrupts other behaviors, what side effects occur, or how results are observed. This is a significant gap for an action-oriented tool.

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 clear sentence with the action and object front-loaded. There is no wasted detail, and it is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

Although the tool has no parameters, it has nontrivial behavioral implications and sits among many vision-related siblings. The description does not mention how results are retrieved, whether the search runs in the background, or any conditions around invoking it, so an agent lacks enough context to use it effectively.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially fully covered and the description does not need to explain arguments. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing missing parameter-wise.

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 states a specific action ('actively search') with a clear target ('faces in the environment'), so an agent understands what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from related siblings like vector_face_detection or vector_list_visible_faces, so differentiation must be inferred.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vector_face_detection, vector_list_visible_faces, or vector_scan. The description implies an active search mode but provides no prerequisites, exclusions, or context for choosing it over siblings.

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