dedupe_csvMerge duplicate contact records into one row per group and write a cleaned CSV, reporting conflicting values instead of dropping them.
Merge duplicate groups into one row each and write a cleaned CSV. Conflicting values are reported, never dropped silently.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| out | No | Output path; defaults to <name>.deduped.csv | |
| file | Yes | ||
| fields | No | ||
| dry_run | No | ||
| threshold | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does add one useful trait: conflicting values are reported, never silently dropped. However, it does not clarify dry_run behavior, threshold semantics, overwrite behavior, or what 'reported' means, so significant behavior remains undisclosed.
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?
Two sentences with no filler: the primary action is front-loaded and the conflict-handling guarantee is stated separately. Every phrase 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?
The tool has five parameters, a nested fields object, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description must carry more context. It explains the core output and conflict safety but omits threshold meaning, dry_run effects, field mapping, and required input details, making it insufficient for correct invocation without additional inference.
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 description coverage is only 20% (only 'out' has a description), so the description must compensate for file, fields, dry_run, and threshold. It does not explain any of these parameters or how fields/threshold control deduplication, leaving key invocation details undocumented.
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 states a specific verb and resource: merge duplicate groups into one row each and write a cleaned CSV. It is clear enough to distinguish from find_duplicates, which likely only locates duplicates, though it never explicitly names that sibling or states the contrast.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus profile_csv, find_duplicates, or compare_records. The description implies a deduplication workflow but provides no conditions, exclusions, or alternative tool routing, leaving the agent to infer applicability.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.