ahk-mcp

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context about the four viewing modes and the active file mechanism, but doesn't mention performance characteristics, rate limits, or what happens with invalid file paths. It doesn't contradict the annotation.

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 well-structured sentences with zero waste. The first sentence covers core functionality, modes, and key features. The second provides important context about the active file mechanism. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a read-only viewing tool with comprehensive schema coverage (100%) and readOnlyHint annotation, the description provides adequate context about functionality and usage. The lack of output schema means the description doesn't explain return values, but for a file viewing tool, this is acceptable. It could benefit from more detail about what each mode provides.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all 9 parameters thoroughly. The description mentions 'Modes: structured (default), raw, summary, outline' which aligns with the 'mode' parameter enum, and 'Supports line ranges and syntax highlighting' which references lineStart/lineEnd and highlightSyntax parameters. It adds some context but doesn't provide significant value beyond the comprehensive 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 explicitly states 'View AHK files with structure analysis' - a specific verb ('View') and resource ('AHK files') with additional functionality ('structure analysis'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like AHK_File_Edit, AHK_File_Create, and AHK_File_List by focusing on viewing/analysis rather than modification, creation, or listing.

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 clear context about modes and features, and explicitly mentions 'Use AHK_File_Active to select a target' for the active file functionality. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool versus alternatives like AHK_File_Edit for modifications or AHK_Analyze for deeper analysis.

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