telys_tune

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it may apply changes, dry_run true never applies, false always applies, omitting follows the tuner default, and the call fails if the collection does not exist. It does not detail what applying a plan changes or whether it is reversible, but the provided semantics are materially useful.

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 three tight sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by required/optional parameters and failure behavior. Every sentence contributes actionable information.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no positive annotations, the description covers required input, optional behavior, failure condition, and intended use case. It does not describe the TuningPlan return shape, but the core decision to call and how to call it is sufficiently supported.

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 only 50% because collection has no description, but the tool description compensates by marking collection as required and defining the full dry_run semantics. This gives the agent enough parameter-level understanding without opening the schema.

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 action: 'Produce a TuningPlan for a collection via its Tuner' and clarifies it is for inspecting or applying index/maintenance recommendations. This distinguishes it clearly from the sibling search, add, and collection-management tools. It is not a tautology and names a concrete resource and operation.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use to inspect or apply index/maintenance recommendations.' It also explains the dry_run behavior with three clear modes. However, it does not explicitly contrast with similar-looking siblings like telys_build_ivf, telys_build_lexical, or telys_compact, so it leaves some selection reasoning to the agent.

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