deduplicate_results

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'remove' but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether the input array is modified, returned, or output schema), permissions needed, or limits. Critical behavioral traits like return value and idempotency are missing.

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?

A single sentence conveys the tool's core function with zero wasted words. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simplicity, the description is missing crucial details about output (what is returned after deduplication) and behavior (does it keep first occurrence?). Without an output schema or more context, the description is incomplete for confident invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters (results array and threshold). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, such as how text similarity is computed or default behavior when threshold is omitted. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'remove duplicate search results' and the method 'based on text similarity', making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cluster_results' which groups items rather than removing duplicates.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cluster_results for grouping, or exact deduplication tools). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or typical use cases, leaving the agent without decision support.

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