Decrypt text (AES-256-GCM)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: it verifies integrity and reports wrong passwords or tampering instead of returning garbage, and accepts base64url with line breaks.

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 tight sentences front-load the core action, input source, integrity behavior, and input tolerances. Every sentence 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?

For a read-only decrypt tool with no output schema, the description covers the key contract: source format, password requirement, integrity verification, and acceptance of base64url/line breaks. It could mention the returned decrypted string more explicitly, but the error behavior is clear.

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%, so the schema documents all four parameters. The description still adds meaning for the 'encrypted' parameter by explaining it accepts base64url and line breaks, beyond the schema's note that it starts with S3E1.

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 gives a specific verb ('Decrypt') and resource ('S3E1.… message'), and names its counterpart crypto_text_encrypt. It also clarifies the source format and website, distinguishing it from crypto_file_decrypt.

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?

It clearly states the input must come from the S3eidat Text Encrypt website or crypto_text_encrypt, and that a password is required. It does not explicitly exclude other tools or explore alternatives, but the context is strong.

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