get_decision_clusters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by explicitly stating 'Read-only' and detailing the return format and row structure (title, summary, member count, preview). 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 four sentences, front-loading the core action and then adding row details, usage hint, and return format. Every sentence is meaningful, with no extraneous text.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by specifying the return structure and row fields. It covers the key behavioral aspects (filtering, sorting via order_by) but could mention pagination implications of the limit parameter.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only referencing the 'full-text filter' option for the search parameter. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'List decision clusters' with optional full-text filter, and details each row's content. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from chronological browsing but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'build_decision_clusters' or 'get_cluster_decisions'.

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 provides usage context ('Use to navigate the decision store by topic instead of chronologically') but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternative tool references. No exclusions are mentioned.

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