sanitize_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that scrubbing is local (no data leak) and replaces matches with safe placeholders. It does not detail performance or determinism but provides sufficient behavioral insight.

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 concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the action and the second provides a practical recommendation. Front-loaded with essential information.

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 output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. It covers the core purpose and usage context. Could mention that output is also text with placeholders, but not necessary.

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% with both parameters documented. The description adds value by listing all available profiles (e.g., 'Dev', 'Medical') and noting defaults, but this is also partly in the schema's description. Minor extra context.

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 scrubs PII, secrets, and credentials from text and replaces them with placeholders. It specifies the action is local and differentiates from siblings like 'sanitize_file' (for files) and 'reveal_text' (presumably reverse).

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 advises using the tool before passing data to an LLM to keep data secure. It implies when to use and emphasizes 'Locally' to indicate no data is sent externally, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives.

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