text_line_counter

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not clarify the output format (whether it returns statistics or modified text) or any side effects. The behavioral traits are only hinted at by the feature list.

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 short but includes redundant 'Menu ID: line_counter. Line Counter.' The core information is front-loaded, but the structure could be improved by removing the menu ID and focusing on functionality.

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 three required parameters and no output schema, the description does not fully specify input requirements or output behavior. The reference to describe_tool indicates incompleteness.

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 description adds context for showLineNumbers and skipBlankLines by mentioning line number addition and blank line detection, but it fails to describe the 'text' parameter and leaves ambiguity about how the boolean parameters affect output. With 0% schema coverage, more detail is needed.

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 lines, provides detailed line analysis, detects blank lines, analyzes line lengths, and adds line numbers. This distinguishes it from other text tools like text_counter or text_add_line_numbers.

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 usage scenarios but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like text_counter or text_text_statistics. It mentions using describe_tool for full guidance, which suggests the description lacks sufficient context for selection.

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