@hanakoxbt: your agent has thirty tools. it calls two of them. the other twenty eight are not sitting idle somewhere. they are in t…
Summary
Unused tools in an AI agent's toolset still consume tokens and add noise to tool selection, so agents should load only the tools required for the current task.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 08/10/26, 03:31 AM
your agent has thirty tools.
it calls two of them.
the other twenty eight are not sitting idle somewhere. they are in the request, every request, and they are doing damage in two places at once.
first the obvious one. tool schemas go into the prompt, and a schema is not a name.
it is a description, a parameter list, types, required fields, an example. thirty of those is a few thousand tokens that ship with every single call, including the ones where the agent just says thanks and stops.
you are paying rent on twenty eight tools that have never fired.
second, and this is the one that costs more.
when the request says cancel the order, the model picks by matching against everything available. four of your tools are plausible: cancel_order, refund_order, update_order, void_order.
it is choosing among them based on the descriptions you wrote, one afternoon, months ago.
every tool you add is another candidate in that shortlist. the twenty eight you never call are not neutral. they are noise in the one decision that determines whether the run works.
why it grows without anyone deciding to
nobody adds thirty tools on purpose.
you add one for a task, it works, it stays. six months later the registry is a catalogue and no one has ever removed anything, because removing a tool feels risky and adding one feels free.
and there is no feedback telling you otherwise. the unused ones never error. they never appear in a failing trace. they are invisible in exactly the way that lets them accumulate.
what to actually do
count calls per tool over the last thousand runs. this is one group-by and it usually shocks people. the ones at zero are pure cost.
ship the tools the task needs, not the whole registry. a research phase does not need deploy. a writing phase does not need the database.
swap the set between phases instead of loading everything up front. same agent, different tools, depending on where the run is.
and when two tools could both plausibly answer the same request, that is not redundancy you can ignore. it is a coin flip you built into the system.
the twenty eight tools are not unused.
they are used every time, by the part of the run you cannot see.
Similar Articles
At what tool count does your agent start getting dumber?
The author discusses how AI agents' reasoning degrades with too many tools, noting a cap of 20 tools by Genie Code, and invites community discussion on solutions.
do agents get worse to maintain as you add more tools?
Explores the potential challenges of maintaining AI agents as the number of integrated tools increases, questioning scalability and complexity.
@alex_prompter: My agents kept getting dumber every time I gave them more tools. The reason is mechanical. Every MCP server you connect…
Ratel is an open-source tool that reduces input tokens by 79% and improves tool selection accuracy for AI agents by loading only needed tools using a BM25 index, instead of all available tools.
20 actually-useful agents I'm running right now (no theory, just working ones)
A practitioner shares 20 real AI agents for sales, operations, content, dev, and finance that are actively used and have survived the first week, emphasizing single-job agents with approval gates and structured output.
@PrajwalTomar_: STOP. Before you add another AI agent, read this. People are now running 20 coding agents in parallel. TWENTY. And tool…
The tweet argues that running too many AI coding agents in parallel degrades codebases and advocates a structured setup with a few specialized agents. It also quotes the launch of Jcode, an open-source agent claiming 20x memory efficiency.