explain_duplicate

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds context: it fetches both CIs and identification rules, compares fields, and returns a JSON with key fields, rules, and comparison. No contradictions.

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, front-loaded with purpose, then covers behavior, prerequisites, example, and parameters. Each sentence adds value 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?

Given the tool's complexity, the description covers prerequisites, parameters, process, and return value summary. Output schema exists, so detailed return fields are not needed. Complete for effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description provides a detailed 'Args:' section documenting each parameter (sys_id_a, sys_id_b, table) and their purpose, adding meaning beyond the input schema's titles and 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 purpose: 'Explain why two CIs might be duplicates by comparing their identification fields.' It then details the process, distinguishing it from sibling tools like find_duplicate_cis.

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?

Explicitly states: 'Prerequisites: Use find_duplicate_cis to identify the duplicate pair first.' This tells when to use the tool and when not to. Also provides an example and argument list.

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