seed_faq

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

No annotations provided. The description only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like destructive potential (overwrites existing data?), idempotency, or required permissions. For a seed operation, such details are critical.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 complexity is low (no parameters, simple action) and output schema exists, the description is mostly adequate but lacks information on idempotency, error states, and whether seeding is cumulative or replaces. Agent may need to infer or test.

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?

No parameters in schema, so description adds no parameter info. Baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose. No additional parameter details needed.

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 action ('Seed') and the resource ('knowledge base') with a specific dataset ('ML FAQ dataset'). It distinguishes from sibling query tools (query_rag, query_rag_with_fallback) by implying this is an initialization step.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, idempotency, or whether it should be run once or on updates. Sibling tools are query-focused but no explicit comparison.

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