create_polyglot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the output file is valid as either format, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., file modification, permissions, limitations on file types). More detail on behavior would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences concisely convey the tool's purpose, method, and an example. No redundant information, clearly front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's function and provides a concrete example. Lacks detail on error cases or compatibility, but is complete enough for a straightforward creation 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 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond the schema, as it only repeats that file1 is prepended and file2 is appended. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the verb 'create' and the resource 'polyglot files', explaining the method of prepending one file format before another. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'file_polyglot' (likely detection) and provides an illustrative example with PDF and ZIP.

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 creating polyglot files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage is suggested but not clarified beyond the core purpose.

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