text_vertical

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core transformation (vertical output from top to bottom, column-based) but omits details such as column progression direction (right-to-left vs left-to-right), output format, and handling of whitespace/punctuation. This is adequate for a simple text transform but has clear gaps.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence delivers the core function without superfluous words. The key term '文字竖排' appears first, and the rest provides necessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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 no output schema, so the description need not explain return values exhaustively. It covers purpose and key mechanics, but lacks explicit usage guidance, parameter defaults, and edge-case behavior. It is adequate for straightforward use 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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must add parameter meaning. It refers to '文本' (text) and '指定列数' (specified column count), giving semantic roles to both parameters. However, it does not mention the default of 6 for cols or its range, though those are in the schema. It adds some value but does not fully compensate for missing parameter descriptions.

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 specific verb and resource: '将文本按指定列数从上到下竖排输出' (output text vertically from top to bottom by specified columns). It clearly identifies this as traditional Chinese vertical typesetting ('传统中文排版'), distinguishing it from siblings like text_flip or text_format.

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 parenthetical '传统中文排版' implies a use case, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives like text_flip or text_format. No exclusions or alternatives are named, leaving the usage context somewhat implied rather than explicit.

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