generate_foxbrizio_caption

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the function (generating a caption) with vague optimization claims ('viral', 'engagement máximo'). It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any side effects, required permissions, or what the output format looks like.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the key action. It is concise with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing brevity, e.g., by mentioning the input-output relationship.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks context about the generation process, the relationship between script and caption, and how platform-specific optimization works. The sibling tools suggest a pipeline, but this description does not clarify its place in 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 100% with all parameters documented inline. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Per guidelines, baseline is 3 for high coverage, and the description does not improve or degrade this.

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 generates a viral caption for social networks optimized for engagement. The verb 'genera' and resource 'caption' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like generate_foxbrizio_script, which also generates content for the same domain.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context that would help an agent decide between this and generate_foxbrizio_script or other siblings.

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