shuf

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, and description confirms 'Read-only, no side effects.' It also explains output format ('Returns JSON with shuffled lines by default; use --raw for plain output') and seed behavior, adding value beyond 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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with main purpose, and each sentence adds value. No waste, efficiently communicates purpose, usage boundaries, and key features.

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 9 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations present, description adequately covers purpose, output format, reproducibility, and exclusions. Comprehensive for agent use.

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 all parameters described. Description adds helpful context about default output (JSON) and raw mode, but does not significantly extend schema info. Small addition raises above baseline of 3.

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?

Description clearly states the tool randomly permutes input lines, with optional deterministic seeding. It specifies the action (permute), resource (input lines), and key features (random, seed). It also distinguishes from sibling tools 'sort' and 'uniq'.

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 guidance: 'Use to randomize line order. Not for sorting — use 'sort' for ordered output. Not for deduplication — use 'uniq'. See also 'sort', 'uniq'.' This clearly tells when to use and when not, with alternative tool names.

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