Minionify Text

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

Description adds value beyond annotations by clarifying the transformation is 'lossy wordplay, not a real-language translation', which warns about semantic fidelity. Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive operations; this extra context improves transparency.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no redundant information. Every word adds value.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, output schema present), the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the nature of the transformation (lossy wordplay) and input constraints (short sentence). Output schema handles return value documentation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description adds minimal parameter-specific context (e.g., 'short sentence' implies text length), but doesn't supplement the schema's parameter descriptions significantly.

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?

Description clearly states the tool 'creatively restyle[s] a short sentence or summary', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (chat, search, hunt) by focusing on single-sentence transformation, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate.

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?

Description implies usage for user-supplied short text ('short sentence or summary'), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like minion_chat or minion_bun_hunt, nor any exclusions.

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