Calculate Hash

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds specific algorithm (SHA-256) and scope (file or directory), which are not in annotations. However, it does not disclose potential performance impacts for large directories or error cases.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. Every word is essential, and there is no redundancy or extraneous information.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema exists (not shown), so the description need not detail return values. It covers purpose and scope adequately but lacks usage context. Overall, mostly complete for a straightforward read-only tool.

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 100% with the 'path' parameter fully described as 'Absolute path to file or directory.' The description does not add semantic value beyond the schema. Per guidelines, high coverage yields baseline 3.

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 specific action 'Calculate SHA-256 hash' and the target resource 'file or directory'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and this unique purpose distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'stat' or 'diff_files'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'stat' for metadata, 'grep' for content). It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or context. This lack of usage guidance limits effective tool selection.

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