scan_text

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

Lacks annotations, so description must carry burden. It mentions the AI detection requirement and mask strategy options, but does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, or permissions needed.

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?

Description is concise with clear section headers for args and returns. No wasted sentences, though slightly verbose for a short text.

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?

With output schema present (not shown) and parameters fully described, the description covers essential info. However, it omits context like prerequisites (API key) and relationship to siblings.

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?

Input schema coverage is 0%, so description fully compensates. It explains each parameter: 'text' as the text to scan, 'enable_ai' with environment requirement, and 'mask_strategy' with explicit enum values (mask|replace|hash|keep_format|redact).

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 tool's purpose: detecting sensitive information in text. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like scan_file or mask_text, which could cause 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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With siblings like scan_file and mask_text available, the description should mention scenarios or exclusions.

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