hwp_enum

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the conversion operation and enumerates accepted enum_type values, which is useful. It does not mention behavior for invalid values, case sensitivity, or error handling.

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 short, front-loaded with the purpose, and every section earns its place: the purpose statement, supported enum types, and parameter definitions. There is no redundant or vague wording.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. For a two-parameter conversion utility, it gives purpose, supported enum types, and parameter meanings. The main gap is the lack of error-behavior guidance and usage context, but overall it is usable.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description compensates with an Args section explaining both enum_type and value. It also lists allowed enum_type categories. It could add examples of valid enum member strings, but the provided meaning is above baseline.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Convert string to HWP enum value.' It also lists supported enum_type values, making the tool's scope concrete. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, but the unique conversion purpose is still evident.

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 implies when to use the tool by listing valid enum_type categories, which gives an agent concrete direction. However, it does not explain when not to use it, mention alternatives, or describe prerequisites.

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