sort_data

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

The description discloses the cost ($0.001 USDC via x402), which is a behavioral trait. However, it gives no information about side effects, whether the operation is read-only, what happens to input data, or any other behavioral details. Given no annotations, this is minimal disclosure.

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 short but under-specified. It consists of a name repetition and a cost note, lacking any structural elements like parameter details or examples. This is not conciseness; it is insufficiency.

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 generic schema, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does, how to invoke it, what inputs are required, or what output to expect. Given the large sibling set and the tool's potential complexity, this is wholly inadequate.

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 input schema has a single generic 'params' object with an unhelpful description, and the tool description adds no parameter information. The description does not clarify what parameters are needed, what data types are expected, or how the sorting is configured. The high schema coverage does not compensate because the existing schema description is vacuous.

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 simply repeats the tool name 'sort data' without specifying what data, what sorting algorithm, or what kind of input is expected. It adds only a category label and cost, making it effectively tautological and not distinguishing it from other text manipulation tools in the sibling list.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, use cases, or which sibling tools might be preferred for similar tasks. The description provides no context for selection.

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