eap_convert_to_markdown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the tool is free and has a 50MB size limit, but does not disclose what happens on failure, whether it is read-only, or any authentication requirements. The lack of such details hinders safe invocation.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a clear list of supported formats. Every word contributes to understanding, with no redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, supported formats, cost, and input requirement (public URL). It does not explicitly state the output format (Markdown is implied by the name), but it is sufficient for an agent to use correctly. Minor omission: no mention of return type or error behavior.

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% for the single parameter 'url', which the schema describes as 'Publicly accessible URL'. The description adds value by listing supported document formats (PDF, Word, etc.), which is not in the schema, thus helping the agent understand what types of URLs are acceptable.

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 converts documents to Markdown, specifies supported formats, and distinguishes itself from siblings which are PDF-specific operations. The verb 'convert' and resource 'document to Markdown' are explicit.

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 tells when to use (to convert documents to Markdown), the required input (a publicly accessible URL), and lists supported formats. It lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the sibling tools are obviously different, providing implicit guidance.

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