wordcount

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully specifies that the delimiter defaults to whitespace and that RegEx patterns require leading/trailing slashes and optional flags. However, it does not mention the return type or edge-case handling (e.g., empty strings), so it is not fully transparent.

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 concise, consisting of three short sentences with no redundant information. The main purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds distinct useful detail about delimiter handling.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description provides adequate context: it states the operation, default delimiter, and RegEx syntax. There is no output schema, but the return value (a count) is implied. It could be improved by clarifying output type and behavior with edge cases, but it is complete enough for typical use.

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?

The input schema defines zero parameters, so the description's explanation of delimiter semantics (default whitespace, RegEx format) adds significant meaning beyond the schema. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description provides valuable usage detail, though it does not explicitly name a delimiter parameter or how to pass it, creating slight ambiguity.

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 counts words in a string, with a specific verb ('Count'), resource ('words in a String'), and delimiter concept. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'countinstances' by focusing specifically on words and mentioning the default whitespace delimiter.

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 the tool is used for counting words, and the delimiter behavior is explained, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as 'countinstances' or 'words'. No exclusions or alternative-naming is provided, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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