aim-security-prompt-tool

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only says 'Security Prompt Enhancement Tool', without disclosing any behavioral traits such as whether it modifies the prompt, returns a new string, or has side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's actions.

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 short phrase, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential information to be helpful. Every word should earn its place; here, the phrase barely adds value over the tool name itself.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or its behavior. With sibling tools like 'prompt-injection-detector', more context is needed to distinguish usage. The description is incomplete.

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 100%, so schema already explains the two parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names and defaults. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Security Prompt Enhancement Tool' is a vague noun phrase. It indicates the tool enhances prompts with security but lacks a clear verb and specific resource. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like prompt-injection-detector, which also deals with prompts.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context where this tool is appropriate. Sibling tools exist, but no comparative information is provided.

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