render_get_formats

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation, the safety profile is already disclosed. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the exact return structure (a map of formatName to description) and indicating that the format names are usable as inputs to other tools. This gives behavioral context about the output's semantics without contradicting the read-only hint.

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 optimally concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a practical usage note. No filler or redundancy, 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?

For a tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it returns and how the result feeds into sibling tools. The presence of the output schema means detailed return-field documentation is not required in the description. It is fully complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 per rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies that no parameters are needed, and there is no additional parameter information required to invoke the tool correctly.

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's function: 'Return available render formats as {formatName: description}.' It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('render formats'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like render_get_codecs and render_get_presets by focusing on formats rather than codecs or presets.

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 direct usage guidance: 'Use the format names as input for render_get_codecs() or render_set_format_and_codec().' This tells the agent when to use this tool (to obtain format names for downstream render operations) and connects it to relevant siblings. It stops short of explicitly listing when not to use it, but the context is clear.

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