cluster

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses deterministic output, node cap, force override, mutual exclusion of parameters, vault requirement, and that no LLM enrichment is performed. This is comprehensive.

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 thorough but each sentence adds value. Slightly longer than necessary, but well-organized and front-loaded with key behavior. Could be structured into clearer sections for parameters.

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, the description fully explains return value structure (cluster_id, size, members, summary fields) and the deterministic nature. It also addresses memory opacity inheritance from expand. The tool's role is complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains each parameter in detail: query path, seed_doc_ids path, vault, method (const), query_top_k (default/max), force (default). It adds operational semantics beyond 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 it performs community detection via Louvain modularity, with deterministic behavior and specific cluster_id assignment. It distinguishes itself from siblings (like expand, search) by focusing on clustering.

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 explicitly explains when to use query vs seed_doc_ids, the mutually exclusive constraint, vault requirement in multi-vault setups, and force override for node cap. It does not explicitly name alternatives but provides clear usage context.

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