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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It implies a read operation but does not state whether it modifies the input, requires special permissions, or what the return format or error cases are. Mentioning the underlying tools adds some value but not enough.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main action and methods. It is efficient and not verbose, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

Given 4 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It lacks information about input format, output, prerequisites, and error handling, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions 'optional passphrase,' leaving api_key, filename, and content_base64 completely unexplained. The schema itself has no descriptions, so agents cannot infer their meaning.

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?

States a specific verb ('Extract') and resource ('hidden data'), and names the methods (steghide + zsteg LSB), making it clear what the tool does and distinguishing it from unrelated siblings like lynx_recon or lynx_order.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention conditions like needing a file with steganographic content or when to prefer it over other tools. The only hint, 'optional passphrase,' is parameter-specific, not usage guidance.

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