convert_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the supported formats and the PB .proto dependency, but does not explain file read/write behavior, whether output_path is optional or defaulted, overwrite behavior, or any side effects of conversion.

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?

The description is a single compact sentence with no filler. The action and format scope are front-loaded, and the important Protocol Buffers caveat is included efficiently.

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?

This is a complex tool supporting eight formats with a nested options object and no output schema, but the description only lists formats and one dependency. It omits the overall conversion contract, behavior when output_path is absent, format compatibility, and practical guidance for selecting options.

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 75%, and the nested options properties are individually documented. The description adds limited extra value by highlighting the PB .proto requirement, though the schema already documents proto_schema_path. It does not clarify input_path, output_path, or conversion direction beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb and resource: '结构化数据转换' (structured data conversion), and enumerates the exact supported formats (JSON/YAML/XML/TOML/CSV/TSV/Parquet/Protocol Buffers). This format list distinguishes it from sibling tools like convert_image, convert_pdf, and convert_media.

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 supported format list implies when convert_data should be used, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives like convert_markup or convert_document, nor any exclusions. The only usage-related hint is the .proto requirement for Protocol Buffers.

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