Case convert

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: line-by-line conversion, Unicode handling for Arabic/accents/ß, and smart title casing that preserves small words and mixed-case tokens like iPhone/NASA. It does not discuss empty input or error behavior, keeping it from a 5.

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 definition is a compact, front-loaded paragraph that lists modes first and behavioral notes second. The trailing web-version URL is non-essential but minor, and every other clause 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 simple two-parameter pure function with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description provides enough context to call it correctly: all modes, smart title behavior, line-by-line processing, and Unicode handling. The only minor omission is an explicit statement of the return value, though the converted-text output is self-evident.

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% and the mode enum already lists valid values, so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by explaining the semantics of 'title' mode (smart casing, small-word handling, preserving iPhone/NASA) and by noting line-by-line and Unicode behavior that the schema does not convey.

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 ('Convert text case') and enumerates all conversion modes, making it immediately distinguishable from siblings like text_slugify or text_fancy. An agent can tell exactly what the tool produces without opening the schema.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool by naming every supported case conversion, including smart title behavior. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to prefer text_slugify or text_fancy), so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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