retrieve

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. It only implies a read-only operation by saying 'Look up information', but fails to explicitly state it is read-only, does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior. This is a significant gap for a retrieval tool.

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 relatively concise, using a bullet list of use cases. It is front-loaded with the purpose statement. However, some redundancy exists with 'Use this tool when you need to' repeated for each item.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, including a complex nested filter object, and no output schema. The description does not explain the return format, pagination, or how results are structured. It only vaguely mentions 'information', leaving the agent without sufficient context to interpret the response.

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% and all parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states 'Look up information in the Knowledge Base' and lists specific use cases (e.g., 'Find relevant documents', 'Retrieve company policies'). It directly addresses what the tool does with a specific verb and resource.

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 a bullet list of when to use the tool, such as 'Find relevant documents or information' and 'Get contextual information'. It implicitly guides usage but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though no sibling tools exist.

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