Tool Error

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure responsibility. It clearly states the tool always errors with isError true and clarifies that it is not a protocol-level error, providing useful context. It does not detail the error message content, but the key behavioral trait is fully disclosed.

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 with the core behavior front-loaded ('Always returns a tool execution error'). It is concise and contains no unnecessary words 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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is fully complete. It precisely specifies what the tool does without needing to explain parameters or return values. The purpose is fully captured.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty schema is fully covered. The description adds no parameter semantics because none are needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 always returns a tool execution error via isError true, and explicitly distinguishes this from a JSON-RPC protocol error. This specific verb and resource make the tool's purpose unambiguous and differentiate it from siblings like structured_result or echo_meta.

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 only states what the tool does, not when or why to use it. It does not reference any testing scenarios or contrast with alternative tools. There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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