prompt_tools

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds minor context about local availability and LemGen but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond annotations. No side effects or authentication needs are mentioned.

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 short with two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It is efficient but the second sentence about LemGen could be seen as slightly tangential. Still, it is not verbose and avoids clutter.

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 tool has 4 parameters (3 enums) and no output schema, the description is too brief. It fails to explain the differences between actions, the role of targetLanguage, or expected results. An agent lacks sufficient context to correctly invoke the tool, especially without schema descriptions.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not compensate. It does not explain the four parameters, the meaning of each action, or the purpose of mediaType and targetLanguage. The schema's enums provide some structure, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 purpose: to translate, polish, or improve an AI image/video prompt. It uses specific verbs and identifies the resource (prompt), making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like enhance_prompt, which may overlap.

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 mentions 'Free locally' and the optional LemGen prompt tool, providing some context on when to use this tool vs. an alternative. But it lacks explicit guidance on when to use each action (translate vs. improve vs. polish) and does not address sibling tools.

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