check_embedding_drift

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: re-embedding, cosine drift reporting, alarm threshold, idempotence of capture, and the purpose of catching silent provider upgrades. It lacks details on auth or rate limits but is reasonably transparent.

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 extremely concise, using three sentences to convey core behavior, parameters, and rationale without redundancy.

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?

The description covers drift detection workflow but lacks explicit output format details (e.g., what the report contains). For a simple tool, it's adequate but not fully complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining default threshold equivalence and capture idempotence behavior, going beyond schema 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 identifies the tool as an 'embedding-drift canary' with a specific verb (re-embeds and reports) and a distinct resource (CANARY_STRINGS). It differentiates from sibling tools which are primarily get/search/index operations.

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 explains usage 'without args' and 'with capture=true', detailing when to seed the snapshot. It implies the tool is for drift detection but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative tools.

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