string_unescape

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

No annotations are provided, but the description adds a key behavioral trait: malformed escape sequences raise ValueError. It also implies the tool does not modify text beyond unescaping. It does not disclose permissions, side effects, or other potential behaviors.

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 paragraph with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, lists styles efficiently, and ends with error behavior. Every sentence 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 no output schema, the description does not explain the return value (the unescaped string). It also omits details about edge cases or constraints. However, for a simple tool with two parameters, the description covers the main use case and error condition.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It states that 'text' is the escaped text and 'style' is one of the listed styles. This adds context beyond the enum values but does not describe format or constraints for 'text'.

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 reverses escaping back to original text, lists all supported styles, and explicitly names its inverse sibling 'string_escape'. This provides a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from siblings.

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 says it's the 'style-for-style inverse of string_escape' and lists the styles, which informs when to use it. It also mentions that malformed sequences raise ValueError, which is a usage caution. However, it does not discuss when not to use this tool versus other siblings like 'decode' or 'encode'.

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