ragflow_retrieval

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits like whether the tool is read-only, permission requirements, or pagination behavior. It only says 'Returns raw chunks' and does not address these aspects, leaving the agent with incomplete understanding of its side effects or constraints.

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 succinct: two sentences that convey the core function and output without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 has 9 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context on how to use parameters like deepening_level or use_rerank, and what the returned chunks contain. It states 'raw chunks with similarity scores' but lacks detail on the structure of the response, which is necessary for an agent to process the output 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide (e.g., page, top_k). It mentions 'similarity scores' but does not clarify how parameters like similarity_threshold relate to the output.

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 'Retrieve' and the resource 'document chunks' from RAGFlow datasets, and specifies the output as 'raw chunks with similarity scores'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ragflow_retrieval_by_name, which likely performs a similar 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ragflow_get_chunks or ragflow_retrieval_by_name. It merely states what the tool does, without context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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