command_preview

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

The description says 'Preview', implying a read-only operation, but annotations set readOnlyHint:false, suggesting the tool may not be read-only. This is a direct contradiction. No other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded, concise, and free of filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core function.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description is too sparse for a tool with six parameters and an enum. It doesn't explain the semantics of 'action', 'target', 'arguments', or 'project_path', leaving the agent to infer critical details from the schema alone.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description mentions none of the six parameters, the required project_path and action, or the action enum. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('preview') and resource ('catalog action'), and differentiates itself by noting it works without a dynamically refreshed tool list. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like project_open or catalog_search.

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 gives a clear context for when to use the tool: to preview a catalog action without needing to refresh the tool list. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the intended use case is unambiguous.

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