merge_entities

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

Discloses that references are migrated and the source entity is deleted, which is critical behavioral information. However, it lacks details on potential side effects (e.g., downstream updates, error handling) and does not clarify if the operation is reversible or requires special permissions. No annotations are present to augment this.

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 concise, using 3 lines plus structured Args and Returns. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, explaining the process, and detailing parameters. No extraneous text.

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?

Covers the core behavior but omits important context such as return value format, error conditions (e.g., what if entities don't exist?), and operational requirements (e.g., user permissions). Given no annotations and a basic output schema ('操作结果'), more detail would benefit completeness.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides clear semantic meaning for each parameter: 'from_entity_id' is the entity to be merged (source), 'to_entity_id' is the target, and 'reason' is the justification. This adds significant value beyond the schema's plain types.

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 merges two entities manually, with specific verb '合并' (merge) and resource '实体' (entity). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'canonicalize_entities_v1' by specifying manual action and deletion of source.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'canonicalize_entities_v1'. The description says '手动合并' (manual merge) but does not explain when manual vs automatic merging is appropriate, nor does it list prerequisites or exclusions.

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