convert_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose important traits such as psd1 requiring pwsh in restricted language mode and XML using @attr/#text conventions. However, it does not describe overwrite behavior when output_path is used, error handling, or other operational limits.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core conversion purpose and supported formats. Each sentence adds operational detail without repetition or filler.

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?

The description is largely complete for a conversion tool, especially since an output schema exists and return formatting need not be explained. It covers input modes, format inference, output writing, psd1 requirements, and XML conventions, but omits edge-case behavior such as overwrites.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully explains path/text input, from_format inference from extension, output_path writing behavior, and to_format through the listed target formats, though it does not explicitly call out to_format as required.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Convert', and names the supported formats json, yaml, toml, csv, xml, and psd1. It clearly identifies the resource and operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as pandoc_convert.

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?

It explains that either path or text may be provided, that from_format is inferred from the file extension when omitted, and that output_path controls whether the result is written or returned. It does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like pandoc_convert or query_data.

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