sha512sum

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

ReadOnlyHint annotation is confirmed by description stating 'Read-only, no side effects'. Description adds context about output format (JSON per-file hash), which is beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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 plus one line, front-loaded with main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, safety, output format, usage guidelines, alternatives. No redundancy.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, output format, and usage guidance. However, it doesn't elaborate on the verification mode (--check flag) but the schema does. Missing explicit return value structure, but JSON per-file hash is sufficient for a hash 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema adequately explains all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline.

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?

Clear verb 'Compute SHA-512 hash digests' with specific resources 'files or stdin' and output 'JSON with per-file hash values'. Distinguishes from siblings by noting highest-strength SHA-2 variant.

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?

Explicit when-to-use 'maximum cryptographic security margin' and when-not 'not for performance-sensitive use on 32-bit systems — use sha256sum'. Names alternatives and provides rationale.

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