ascii_table

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only mentions cost, offering no insight into inputs, outputs, side effects, or operational details. This is a significant gap for a tool whose core function is completely unspecified.

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 extremely short, but brevity is not conciseness here because it omits essential information. The first clause is redundant with the tool name, and the cost note is the only substantive piece—yet it fails to compensate for the missing purpose.

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 the lack of output schema and the vague sibling context, the description is utterly incomplete. An agent cannot infer what the tool does, how to invoke it, or what results to expect.

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 exposes a single generic 'params' object with no specific parameters. The description adds no semantic value, leaving the agent with zero understanding of what parameters to pass or what they mean.

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 only restates the name 'ascii table' and categorizes it as 'Other Utilities tool.' There is no verb or explanation of what the tool actually does, making it a tautology that does not distinguish it from dozens of sibling utilities.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or how it differs from alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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