md_format

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool modifies only formatting details, explicitly promises not to remove content, and scopes the operation to specific transformations. It does not mention the default overwrite behavior, but the schema covers that.

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?

Two compact sentences deliver the action, the scope, the safety guarantee, and the rationale with no redundant wording. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple two-parameter formatting tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, scope, and behavioral constraints. It lacks explicit mention of return values or error behavior, but no output schema exists and the operation is straightforward for an agent to infer.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents both parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond the overall tool purpose, which meets the baseline expectation but does not exceed it.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Normalize an existing .md file.' It names the exact transformations (fence spacing, blank lines around tables/headings) and explicitly states content is not removed, which clearly differentiates it from conversion, preview, style, and status siblings.

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 rationale 'Keeps Wiki + Sublime preview consistency' provides clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the sibling list and the focus on formatting make the intended use reasonably apparent.

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