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

No annotations provided. Description only states the conversion action without detailing safety, side effects, handling of malformed HTML, output format, or any limitations. Agent has no awareness of behavior beyond the basic operation.

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?

Extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence earns its place, but could benefit from a more structured breakdown of parameters or behavior.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It covers purpose and usage context, but lacks parameter details and behavior transparency, leaving gaps for an agent to fill.

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 has 0% coverage for parameter descriptions. The tool description does not elaborate on the 'html' parameter, leaving the agent with only the type (string) and no additional context about format, encoding, or constraints.

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?

Clearly states conversion from HTML to Markdown with a specific usage context ('for docs the agent edits'). Distinguishes from reverse sibling markdown_to_html, but does not explicitly differentiate from other sibling tools like html_decode.

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?

Provides a clear 'When' clause indicating use case for converting HTML to Markdown for agent-edited docs. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is sufficient for basic guidance.

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