aggregate_sift

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. It mentions running an aggregation pipeline but does not disclose safety (likely read-only), performance implications, or permission requirements. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise, using a docstring format with clear sections (Args, Returns). Every sentence is informative, and the example is directly relevant.

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?

For a complex operation with 2 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: purpose, parameters (with example), and return type. Missing explicit error handling or edge cases.

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?

The description adds value beyond the input schema by explaining both parameters and providing an example for the pipeline argument. However, it does not detail all possible pipeline syntax or limitations.

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 'Run', the resource 'a sift's records', and the method 'MongoDB aggregation pipeline'. It distinguishes from siblings like query_sift and find_records by specifying aggregation.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies usage for aggregation tasks but does not explain when to prefer this over query_sift or find_records.

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