echo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool as echoing a message, which implies idempotent and safe operation. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, limitations) are mentioned, but given the trivial nature of the tool, this is adequate.

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 sentence that is concise and directly to the point. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no fluff.

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 tool's extreme simplicity (single string parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete. It provides all necessary information for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100% coverage with a single parameter 'message' described as 'The message to echo'. The description adds 'Echoes any message passed to it', which essentially paraphrases the schema. With high schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate, and the description does not significantly enhance parameter meaning.

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 'Echoes any message passed to it' uses a specific verb ('echoes') and resource ('message'), clearly stating the tool's function. It is distinct from all sibling tools, which are security/compliance-related, so there is no confusion.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives is provided. However, due to its simplicity and the unrelated nature of sibling tools, the lack of guidance is not a major issue, but still a gap for minimal viable score.

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