encode_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the exact encoding style (encodeURIComponent) and the character transformation behavior (Chinese and special characters to %XX), which goes beyond the raw schema. Minor edge cases are not covered, but the core behavior is transparent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and uses a parenthetical to add the encoding style. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool, the description provides the essential behavioral context and the schema supplies the parameter enum/default. However, it lacks explicit guidance on how to use the action parameter and does not clarify alternatives, leaving the description adequate but not fully 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?

The schema has 2 parameters (text, action) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention either parameter or explain how to select decode via the action parameter. It only describes the overall operation, leaving parameter semantics almost entirely to the schema.

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 does URL encode/decode, using '编码/解码' and specifies 'encodeURIComponent 风格' to distinguish from sibling encoding tools. It names the resource (URL) and the transformation behavior (Chinese and special chars to %XX), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context: this is for URL encoding/decoding in encodeURIComponent style, implying when to use it among the many encode_* siblings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the context is specific and sufficient for selection.

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