Check Password Strength

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context by mentioning the use of k-anonymity for breach exposure checks, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's capabilities without redundancy. Every phrase adds value, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 simple parameter set and good annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose and notable features like k-anonymity. It lists the expected output aspects, but lacks an explicit mention of the return format, though not critical.

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 100% coverage with a minimal description for the single parameter 'password'. The tool description discusses the analysis outputs but does not add further parameter-specific meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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 specifies the verb 'Analyze' and the resource 'password strength', listing specific aspects such as entropy, crack time, common issues, and breach exposure. This distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like hash_text or decode_jwt.

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 for checking password strength but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No guidance on exclusions or context is provided, though the purpose is clear from the name and description.

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