detect_injection

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

Describes return fields (verdict, threat_score, techniques, recommendation) and mentions OWASP mapping. However, does not state whether tool is read-only or has side effects, nor any rate limits or permissions needed.

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?

Concise with front-loaded purpose, but includes a long list of attack types and the OWASP reference which adds value. Could be slightly tighter.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, output, and threat taxonomy. Missing explicit explanation of the 'context' parameter and any side-effect disclosure, but is otherwise comprehensive for a detection tool.

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?

'content' is explained implicitly as 'untrusted text or tool output'. The 'context' parameter is not described at all, leaving ambiguity despite 0% schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the tool screens for prompt injection and manipulation. Lists specific attack types and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on injection detection.

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?

Explicitly says to use on externally sourced text before acting on it. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but context is clear.

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