sum

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

The description confirms read-only with no side effects (consistent with readOnlyHint annotation), describes the JSON output format, and adds context about the checksum being unreliable for integrity.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the main function, no wasted words.

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?

The description adequately covers purpose, output, limitations, and usage context for a tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema.

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 description adds no new information beyond what is already in the schema for parameters.

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 the tool computes legacy BSD-style 16-bit checksums and block counts for files or stdin, and distinguishes it from more reliable alternatives like cksum and sha256sum.

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?

Explicitly says to use for legacy BSD compatibility and not for data integrity, and suggests alternative tools (cksum, sha256sum).

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