echo__echo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the operation (echoing input) without any side effects or hidden behaviors. For a trivial tool, this minimal disclosure is sufficient, though it does not explicitly state return behavior or safety profile.

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 that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is necessary and there is no extraneous information, making it ideal for quick comprehension.

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 tool of this low complexity—with one simple string parameter, no output schema, and no annotations—the description is fully complete. It states exactly what the tool does, and no additional details are needed for correct invocation or interpretation.

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 schema has one required parameter 'text' with no description, and the schema coverage is 0%. The description references 'input text', which maps directly to the parameter, adding meaning by clarifying the intended input. Though it does not explicitly name the parameter, the connection is obvious, making the semantics clear.

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 'Echo the input text back' clearly states a specific verb (echo) and resource (input text), making the tool's function unambiguous. Since there are no sibling tools, differentiation is not required, but the purpose is fully conveyed.

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 implies usage by stating what the tool does—when you need to repeat input text—but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (none exist) or any exclusions. This is an implied usage scenario rather than explicit guidance.

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