encrypt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the encryption algorithm (AES-256) but fails to mention whether the original file is modified or a new file is created, whether it overwrites the input, or any required permissions. The output_name parameter hints at output behavior, but the description itself does not clarify these aspects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It perfectly communicates the core purpose 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?

The operation is simple and the schema covers parameters well, but the lack of behavioral context (e.g., output file behavior, reversibility, or permission requirements) leaves gaps. For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is adequate but not thorough.

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%, with all three parameters (file, password, output_name) already described. The description adds minimal parameter-specific detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not elevate 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Encrypt a PDF with AES-256 password protection.' It uses a specific verb (encrypt) with a resource (PDF) and method (AES-256), distinguishing it from siblings like decrypt and change_permissions.

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?

Usage is implied but not explicit. The description does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'change_permissions' or 'decrypt'. There is no exclusions or alternative guidance, but the operation itself is straightforward enough that an agent can infer intent.

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