rot13_cipher

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool transforms text via letter rotation and allows custom shift. However, it does not mention case handling, non-alphabetic character behavior, or edge cases, leaving some ambiguity.

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 exceptionally concise—two sentences plus a bulleted parameter list—with no unnecessary words. The purpose is front-loaded, making it easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of a likely output schema, the description is adequate. However, it omits mention of case preservation and non-letter handling, which would be helpful for a complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description lists parameters with brief explanations: 'Text to transform' and 'Rotation amount (default: 13)'. This adds meaning beyond parameter names, though more detail (e.g., alphabetic-only operation) would improve clarity.

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 'Apply ROT13 or custom ROT-N cipher (letter rotation)', specifying the verb (apply), resource (cipher), and variant (ROT13 vs custom). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like caesar_cipher and atbash_cipher.

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 implies usage for letter rotation ciphers but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like caesar_cipher. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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