sanitize_file

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

With no annotations, the description provides some transparency: it reads a file, sanitizes, outputs safe version, and keeps original identifiers in memory. However, it does not specify output format, error handling (e.g., file not found), or whether the operation is destructive.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the core action 'Reads a local file'. Every word serves a purpose.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and one behavioral trait (memory handling). Missing details on output format, error conditions, and comparison with sibling tools make it adequate but not complete.

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 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score applies.

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 clearly states the tool reads a local file, sanitizes its contents using a profile, and outputs a safe version. It distinguishes from sibling 'sanitize_text' by specifying file-based input, though it does not explicitly contrast with 'reveal_text'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'sanitize_text' or 'reveal_text'. The description implies it's for file input, but lacks explicit when/when-not conditions or alternatives.

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