transform_to_nm3

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

The description discloses the truncation behavior for large documents (>300 nodes) and states the output format (full XML). However, without annotations, it does not cover other behavioral aspects like idempotency, authorization needs, or side effects.

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 that quickly conveys the action and a key limitation. It is efficient and front-loaded, though slightly ambiguous due to the contradiction between 'full XML' and 'may truncate'.

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?

With no output schema and 5 parameters, the description is insufficient. It contradicts itself (returns full XML but may truncate), lacks information about error conditions, streaming behavior, or the XML structure. For a moderately complex tool, this is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; the truncation note is not parameter-specific. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 verb 'Transform' and the resource 'markdown to NM3', and adds a note about returning XML with a truncation warning. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'transform_to_nm3_chunked'.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The truncation warning hints at a limitation but does not suggest alternatives or contextual usage rules.

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