Audit

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

Annotations already indicate safety (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), but the description adds value by specifying that the tool does not print sensitive terms and performs local checks, which are not captured in annotations.

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 a single, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words.

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 has only one optional parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description is sufficiently complete for this simple tool, though including parameter details would improve it.

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 description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the 'format' parameter, but it does not mention it at all. The schema provides enum and default, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 the verb ('run'), the resource ('local redaction and containment checks'), and a key constraint ('without printing sensitive terms'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like redctx_list or redctx_read.

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 safe checks without exposing sensitive terms, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like redctx_search or redctx_read.

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