lookup_record

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state whether the operation is read-only, what happens when no matches are found, or the format/structure of returned results. 'Look up' implies safety but does not explicitly guarantee non-destructive behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words. However, given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), it is arguably undersized rather than optimally concise, lacking necessary behavioral context.

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?

While the comprehensive input schema (100% coverage) reduces the description's burden for parameter explanation, the absence of annotations and output schema leaves significant gaps regarding return values, error handling, and safety guarantees that the description fails to address. Minimum viable for the complexity level.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input parameters are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, merely referencing 'specific attribute' which maps to the lookupType enum. Baseline score applies.

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 verb (look up), resource (records in DEVONthink), and method (by a specific attribute). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search' or 'get_record_by_identifier', which could cause selection ambiguity.

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 phrase 'by a specific attribute' provides implied usage context, suggesting use when searching via known metadata fields (filename, path, etc.). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over 'search' or 'get_record_by_identifier', and states no prerequisites or exclusions.

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