Summarize CodeFactor Issues

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

Without annotations, the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as network requests, authentication needs (cookie), or the impact of parameters like allPages or maxPages. It only states the output format.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and to the point. It is concise, though it could be slightly expanded to improve clarity.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return structure or how parameters influence the summary, leaving agents with insufficient context.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema itself explains each parameter. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond 'compact Markdown summary', which is adequate but not enhanced.

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 indicates the tool returns a compact Markdown summary of CodeFactor issues, distinguishing it from sibling tools that fetch raw data or parse HTML. However, it could be more specific about the nature of the summary.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fetch_codefactor_issues or parse_codefactor_html. It lacks explicit context for selection.

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