Single tool with clear naming (get_character_count) and adequate description (54 chars). Input schema present with type definitions and parameter descriptions. However, output schema is undocumented (returns int with no structured context), and error handling lacks recovery guidance. No tool annotations. Validation logic exists but error messages are generic. Baseline: avg tool description 194 chars (this is 54); avg params per tool 4 (this has 2). Meets minimum viability but lacks production polish.
Count occurrences of a character in a string.
Output schema undocumented. Tool returns int but LLM has no structured context about what the integer represents or how to use it downstream.
Error messages lack recovery guidance. ValueError exceptions are caught and re-raised without actionable next steps for the LLM (e.g., 'Input text exceeds 10000 chars. Try splitting the text into smaller chunks.').
No tool annotations. Tool lacks readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, or idempotentHint metadata to signal to agents that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation.
Tool description is 54 chars, below baseline avg of 194 chars. Lacks context on WHEN to use this tool vs alternatives, and does not explain the 10,000-char limit or why it exists.
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | D | 56 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |
No pagination or result limits documented. While the single tool is simple, the pattern of accepting unbounded input (text up to 10k chars) without explaining performance implications is a gap.