visualize_board

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation via 'Render' and 'for human reading', implying no side effects. However, it could explicitly state that it does not modify state.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word earns its place.

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 simple parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention that the output is a string or that unicode affects presentation, but the schema covers those.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the fen or unicode parameters.

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 verb 'Render', the resource 'position', and the output 'text board for human reading'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like analyze_position or get_best_move, which focus on analysis rather than visualization.

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?

The description implies usage for visualizing a board but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_position. It lacks a statement of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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