tool_string_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The only behavioral hint is '[viewer]', implying a read-only display, but there is no disclosure of how the content is rendered, whether it truncates large strings, or what the tool returns.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the tool name and '[viewer]' prefix. The parameter list is redundant with the schema but does not make the description bloated. It is efficient, though perhaps too terse.

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, but with no output schema or annotations, the description should at minimum state what the tool returns or how the preview is presented. It currently only names the tool, leaving the agent to guess its 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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, and the tool description repeats the same parameter information verbatim ('content (string): Content'), adding no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 labels the tool as 'String Preview' with a '[viewer]' prefix, indicating it previews string content. However, it lacks a specific verb phrase describing what the preview does (e.g., 'Displays the content in a formatted viewer'), and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like tool_string or tool_json_preview beyond the resource type.

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. It doesn't mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or context.

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