Preview a phrase

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

Annotations are not provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is cheap/fast, produces a short AI explanation, and does not generate a full article. It does not disclose the return format or whether any side effects occur, but for a simple preview utility the core behavior is reasonably clear.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first states what the tool does, and the second adds cost characteristics and the recommended decision use case. 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?

The tool is a simple one-parameter preview with no output schema, and the description covers what it returns ('short AI explanation'), how it behaves ('cheap and fast'), and why to use it. It could more explicitly describe the output format or mention alternatives, but nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the only parameter, text, describing it as 'the phrase or highlighted text to explain.' The description's 'any phrase' adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('short AI explanation of any phrase'), and a boundary ('without generating a full article'). This clearly distinguishes preview_phrase from the creation-focused siblings and makes its purpose immediately intelligible.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'use it to decide whether a topic is worth creating.' It also contrasts itself with full article generation, which implies the main alternative. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools or state conditions where another tool should be chosen instead.

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