is_sensitive

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the tool uses an LLM (requires WARDCAT_LLM_MODEL), returns a boolean, and serves as a holistic gate. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded core function. No wasted words. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, prerequisite, usage advice.

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 with one parameter and an output schema (implied boolean). The description covers the core purpose, prerequisite, and usage context. It could be improved by contrasting with sibling tools like 'scan' to avoid confusion, but overall sufficient.

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 only parameter 'text' is a string with 0% schema coverage. The description adds purpose (checks for sensitive info) but no additional constraints or format details. Score baseline 3 for a simple parameter.

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 returns True if text contains sensitive information, acting as a holistic LLM gate. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'scan' or 'redact', which could serve similar purposes.

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 explicit when-to-use: as a guardrail before forwarding to an external service. It also mentions a prerequisite (requires on-prem LLM layer). However, it lacks guidance on when not to use or alternatives.

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