text_text_trimmer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions trimming and cleaning but does not explain side effects, return value, or whether it is read-only. 'Clean up text formatting' is vague.

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?

Three sentences, but includes superfluous 'Menu ID' repetition and a deferral to `describe_tool`. The first sentence is somewhat redundant with the title. Could be more concise.

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 6 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits crucial details about parameter values and behavior, forcing reliance on `describe_tool`.

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%. The description hints at trimType (leading/trailing/all spaces) and trimEmptyLines, but does not explain the other four parameters (customCharacters, preserveIndentation, etc.). It fails to compensate for the lack of 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?

The description clearly states it trims whitespace, removes empty lines, and cleans text formatting, giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like text_duplicate_line_remover by focusing on whitespace and empty lines, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 others. The description directs to `describe_tool` for full guidance, which shifts responsibility off itself. No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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