blekline_classify_risk

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that it performs no masking and persists no content, which is extra context. It also flags deprecation, which is valuable for the agent. However, it does not describe output format or error behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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 one compact sentence, front-loads the deprecation notice, and wastes no words. It effectively communicates the essential information.

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 is deprecated and has no output schema, the description covers the most critical information (deprecation and read-only nature) but omits return values and the meaning of platform/sourceHost. It is adequate for a deprecated tool with a clear successor, but not fully complete for someone who might still invoke 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only vaguely references 'a prompt' without explaining the platform or sourceHost parameters. It does not compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions, leaving these parameters semantically unclear.

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 states a specific verb ('simulates') and resource ('Blekline redaction policy on a prompt'), and distinguishes from siblings by noting it is read-only and does not apply masking or persist content. It also explicitly names the successor tool.

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 explicitly says '[Deprecated — use blekline_simulate_policy]', providing a clear directive for when to use the replacement tool. It also implies when this tool might have been used (read-only simulation without masking) versus alternatives like blekline_mask_prompt.

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