dedupe_lines

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core algorithm, order preservation, and that the operation is a pure command, but it does not specify return shape or edge-case handling such as empty lines, whitespace, or CRLF.

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 two compact sentences and front-loads the operation before the purity note. No sentence is wasted.

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 simple one-parameter pure transformation, the description covers the essential behavior. It is slightly incomplete because it does not describe the return value or edge-case semantics, but those gaps are minor for this tool's complexity.

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?

The schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so adequately by stating that the input text is split on newlines, making clear what the `text` parameter represents.

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 states a specific transformation: split text on newlines, keep the first occurrence of each line, and preserve order. That is precise enough to distinguish it from every sibling tool (slugify, truncate, fix_json, etc.) without opening the schema.

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 description explains what the tool does but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent can infer it is for duplicate-line removal, but the definition does not route the agent explicitly.

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