search_clauses

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: returns stable chunk IDs, source, offsets, scores; explains 'below_threshold' means abstention (not error); mentions top_scores. No destructive implications or 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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, each sentence adds specific value. No fluff or repetition.

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 output schema or annotations, the description is fairly complete but lacks explanation for the k parameter (only in schema with constraints) and does not fully describe the return structure beyond listing fields. Could be more thorough.

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 67%, and the description adds value: warns against short paraphrases for query, clarifies clause_type constraint. The k parameter lacks description, but overall the description enriches the schema.

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 searches a precedent clause library for CUAD liability spans, and lists what it returns (chunks with IDs, source, offsets, scores). It distinguishes from sibling tools by being explicitly a search function.

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?

Provides strong usage guidance: warns against retrying on weak evidence, advises passing complete clause texts to avoid abstentions. Does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but gives actionable instructions.

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