codebook_related

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

The description explains the algorithm (geometric neighbors + algebraic link-recall) but does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or the nature of the combination (e.g., union or intersection). With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility.

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 a single sentence, concise but at the expense of completeness. It front-loads the core purpose but omits necessary details.

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 four parameters and an output schema, but the description does not explain parameter semantics, output format, or usage context. It is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 no meaning beyond parameter names like 'notes_dir' and 'note_id'. Parameters 'glob' and 'k' are not explained, and schema coverage is 0%. The description fails to clarify the role of any parameter.

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 the tool finds related notes using combined geometric neighbors and algebraic link-recall. It implies retrieval but lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'find'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like codebook_neighbors by mentioning the combined method.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like codebook_neighbors or codebook_query. There are no usage conditions or exclusions.

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