detect_duplicate_bom_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb 'List' clearly implies a read-only operation and the description specifies the output (identity groups with multiple RefDes). However, it omits details about the meaning of 'path', error behavior, or any prerequisites, leaving some behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 concise sentence that is direct and free of fluff. It front-loads the verb and object, making the core purpose immediately visible.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation. It lacks parameter semantics, usage guidelines, and behavioral context, making it difficult for an agent to know when and how to use this tool correctly.

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 schema defines one optional 'path' parameter with no description, and the tool description does not mention it at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent without any clues about what 'path' refers to.

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 'List' and identifies the resource as 'identical BOM identity groups containing multiple RefDes', clearly indicating detection of duplicate BOM entries. It is distinguishable from sibling BOM tools by focusing on duplicate detection, though the terminology is somewhat specialized.

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 over alternatives like review_bom or run_bom_review. It only states the action, without conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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