tee

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

Adds context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: describes dry-run preview, append behavior, and return format (JSON with paths and byte counts). No contradiction with 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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main action, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a tool with 6 params and no output schema, the description explains the output format, usage context, and alternatives. It is sufficiently complete for effective tool selection and 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%, so the description does not need to repeat parameter details. However, it briefly mentions '--dry_run' and '--append' with context, adding minimal value beyond schema.

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 'Read stdin and write simultaneously to files and stdout', providing a specific verb and resource. It also mentions dry-run and append support, and distinguishes from siblings like 'cat', 'shred'.

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 states when to use ('capture intermediate pipeline data') and when not ('not for simple file writing... use redirection or cp'). Provides alternatives like 'shred' and references to 'cat', 'echo'.

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