apply_gender_neutral

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only states the action but does not clarify whether the file is modified in place, what the output is, side effects, or required permissions. This is insufficient for safe agent use.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the primary action with no unnecessary words. It earns its place despite being minimal.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about behavior (e.g., in-place modification, return value) and explain the strategy options. The sibling tools are translation-focused, making this tool's specialized nature require additional context that is missing.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds context that the strategies are 'gender-neutral language strategies' but does not elaborate beyond the schema's enum values. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents parameters adequately.

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 applies gender-neutral language strategies to a locale file. It uses a specific verb ('apply') and resource ('gender-neutral language strategies to a locale file'), and this purpose is distinct from all sibling tools, which focus on translation, formality, or dialect detection.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. Users must infer that it is for adapting locale files to be gender-neutral, but there is no discussion of when each strategy (latine, elles, x, descriptive) is appropriate.

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