xml_xml_extract

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states it returns text content of all elements with given tag, but lacks details on handling of missing tags, nested elements, namespaces, or return format. Output schema exists but not visible. Partial transparency.

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?

Very concise: one sentence plus example. Front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words.

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 extraction tool with output schema, description covers basic purpose and usage. Missing edge cases (empty results, error handling) but overall adequate.

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 description must compensate. It explains xml_string is XML and tag is tag name, with an example. However, it adds no extra detail like case-sensitivity or well-formedness requirements. Minimal value beyond 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 clearly states the tool returns text content of all elements with a given tag name. It specifies the verb 'extract' and resource 'text content from XML', with an example clarifying usage. It distinguishes from siblings like xml_xml_findall (which returns elements) and xml_xml_attrs (attributes).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like xml_xml_findall or xml_xml_to_dict. The example implies usage but does not provide context or exclusions. Given siblings, more guidance would help but is absent.

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