flipper_md5sum

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

Adds key behavioral trait 'without transferring it' beyond annotations (readOnlyHint true). Does not detail output format but sufficient for a read-only hash computation.

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?

Single concise sentence, action first, no wasted words. Efficiently communicates purpose.

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 read-only tool with annotations, description is mostly complete. Could mention that output is the hash string, but not critical given low complexity.

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 50% (only port described). Description does not explain path parameter or add meaning to parameters. Fails to compensate for missing schema details.

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?

Description states a specific verb+resource: 'Compute the md5 of a file on the device'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like flipper_download (transfer) by adding 'without transferring it'.

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?

Implied usage for integrity checks without file transfer, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternatives. Lacks clear guidance.

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