d3p_vibe-check

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the output format (vibe score 1-10, energy classification, analysis) and that cost is 10 sats. However, it does not explain edge cases like empty text, error behavior, or the fact that the tool expects a JSON string parameter.

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 relatively concise at 4 sentences, with the core purpose stated first. The extra details (cost, endpoint, parameter hint) are relevant but add slight redundancy. It is well-structured and easy to scan.

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's moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the return values adequately. However, it lacks details on parameter construction (how to pass the JSON string), edge cases, and error handling, leaving gaps for an AI agent to properly invoke the tool.

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 0% because the schema only shows a generic 'params' string. The description attempts to compensate by specifying a nested 'text' parameter and its requirement. However, it contradicts the schema (description says 'required', schema shows no required parameters) and does not fully clarify the JSON string format.

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 that the tool performs sentiment/vibe analysis on text, returning a vibe score, energy classification, and analysis. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tool 'd3p_emoji-sentiment' which likely performs similar analysis, so differentiation is lacking.

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, nor any context about when it is appropriate or not. The category and cost are mentioned but do not serve as usage guidance.

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