Enhance a prompt

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description does not contradict. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the purpose and the claim 'Free'; it does not disclose limitations, rate limits, or how the input is handled. With annotations covering safety, the description contributes minimal additional transparency.

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 with no redundant phrasing. The word 'Free' is somewhat unnecessary but does not detract. It is front-loaded with the core function, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple with good schema coverage and a read-only annotation, but no output schema exists. The description does not explicitly state what the response contains, nor does it differentiate from the sibling 'clarify_prompt'. The implied return of an enhanced prompt is understandable but lacks detail.

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 clear descriptions for both 'prompt' and 'cloud_provider', including allowed values. The description does not elaborate on parameter usage, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, so a baseline of 3 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 uses a specific verb ('Turn') and clearly identifies the resource ('rough idea' into 'detailed generation prompt'). It effectively conveys the tool's function, though it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'clarify_prompt'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'clarify_prompt'. It does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended contexts beyond the implied purpose of enhancing a rough prompt.

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