format_format_plural

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose important behaviors: default inclusion of count (include_count), handling of edge cases (zero, negative), and automatic pluralization logic (e.g., simply appending 's'?). The example is helpful but incomplete.

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 extremely concise—one sentence plus an example—with no redundant information. Every word adds value.

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 simple pluralization tool, the description covers the core function but lacks details on the include_count parameter and edge cases. An output schema exists but is not shown, so some completeness is assumed. However, more context about default behavior would improve it.

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 has 4 parameters (count, singular, plural, include_count) with 0% schema description coverage. Description adds meaning for count and singular via example, and mentions plural, but does not explain include_count. Partially compensates but leaves a gap.

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 clearly states the tool's function: pluralizing a word based on a count, with an example and mention of optional custom plural form. It distinguishes itself from other format_* tools by its specific purpose.

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 implies usage for formatting plural words, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or contrasts with siblings are provided.

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