echo-server.echo

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

The description states the core behavior (returns input) but does not clarify the destructiveHint annotation (true) nor explain any side effects like logging or state changes. Annotations are present, lowering the burden, but the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the basic echo behavior.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 (one parameter, no nested objects), and the output schema exists, but the destructiveHint annotation (true) remains unexplained, which could create confusion. The description is minimal but does not fully address behavioral nuances or error conditions, leaving some ambiguity for a trivial 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?

The schema already documents the only parameter 'text' with a clear description ('Text to echo'). The description 'Returns whatever you send' implies the parameter is the echoed content but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 'Returns whatever you send' clearly states the tool's function: it echoes the input. The verb 'returns' and the resource 'whatever you send' make the purpose explicit, and the name 'echo-server.echo' reinforces this. There is no sibling tool with a similar purpose, so differentiation is not needed.

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 does not mention typical use cases (e.g., testing, debugging) or any exclusions. Since the tool is trivial, this could be acceptable, but it is still a gap in the description.

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