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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds value by stating the tool returns dependencies with version requirement strings, providing behavioral context beyond 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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Critical information is front-loaded: what the tool does, what it returns, and a key usage hint.

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, the description covers purpose, return format, and a usage hint. Presence of output schema further reduces need for return value explanation. Adequate for agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds extra usage guidance ('Omit version to get the latest'), which goes beyond the schema's parameter info.

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 it gets dependencies for a Ruby gem, using specific verb (get) and resource (dependencies). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_reverse_dependencies by focusing on dependencies of a gem rather than dependents.

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?

Description hints at usage by saying 'Omit version to get the latest', which guides the agent on parameter usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or specify when to use this over get_reverse_dependencies or search_gems.

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