echo_message

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose traits. It states the tool echoes a message with optional formatting and returns metadata, which is sufficient for a simple, side-effect-free operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm idempotency or lack of mutations.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary, followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 simplicity of the tool, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return value adequately. The presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated) further reduces the need for extensive description.

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%, so the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: 'message' as the content to echo, 'uppercase' as a boolean toggle for case conversion. This adds meaning beyond the schema types.

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 uses a specific verb ('echo back') and identifies the resource ('a message') with optional formatting. Siblings 'echo_json' and 'echo_with_delay' are clearly different, as this tool handles plain text echoing.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings, but the purpose and sibling names imply use cases: plain text vs JSON or delayed echoing. An explicit note would improve clarity.

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