crypto_password_strength

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

Annotations already indicate safe operations. Description adds valuable context: 'local, deterministic compute', 'read-only, non-destructive, never stored, password never logged'. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four sentences, well front-loaded with purpose and scope. Every sentence adds necessary information: purpose, returned value, alternative tool, optional params, behavioral guarantees, rate limit. No fluff.

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 has 3 params and an output schema, description covers all key aspects: input handling, behavioral guarantees, rate limiting, and distinction from sibling. Output schema provides return details, so completeness is high.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds explanation of how each parameter affects scoring (e.g., 'if the password contains it (case-insensitive) the score is reduced'), going beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Password Strength Checker' with specific verb 'Score the strength of one password' and resource 'returns a 0-100 score, strength label, etc.' Differentiates from sibling crypto_password_strength_bulk for bulk use.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (single password) and when to use sibling (bulk). Mentions optional parameters and their effect. Also discloses rate limit (30 req/min anonymous), guiding appropriate use.

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