mineru_merge_slices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses output artifacts, page_idx re-basing, ordering by page range, HTML comments, and non-blocking wait behavior. It does not detail overwrite side effects or the exact report/return format, but the main behavioral traits are 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 compact and front-loaded: the core action and outputs appear first, followed by ordering details and the wait/retry behavior. Every sentence contributes useful information and there is no filler.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main inputs, outputs, ordering, and retry guidance. It omits the exact definition of {name} and the structure of the report/status, but it provides enough for an agent to invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add much parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it introduces {name} without defining its source and does not explain overwrite behavior beyond what the schema already says.

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 states a specific verb ('Stitch'), a specific resource ('slices of a mineru_parse_long batch'), and concrete output artifacts ({name}/{name}.md, {name}_content.json, images/). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like mineru_parse_long, which creates slices, and mineru_download_results, which downloads results.

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 clearly ties usage to a mineru_parse_long batch and tells the agent to re-run later if any slice is still processing. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use the tool or name alternative merge/result tools, but the intended context is clear.

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