tsm_diff_digest

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires any permissions. It only describes the output without clarifying side effects or constraints, leaving a gap for an agent.

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 sentences, no redundant information. First sentence states core function and output, second sentence provides use case. Economical and clear.

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?

No output schema, but description outlines the kind of output (structured summary with specific components). For a tool with 2 parameters and no nested objects, this is fairly complete. Could be improved with more specific output format details.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds marginal value by linking the focus enum options to the output components ('behavior changes, risks' correspond to enum values). No further parameter details beyond 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?

Description clearly states verb 'compress' and resource 'git diff', and specifies output includes 'structured summary of changed areas, behavior changes, risks, and a one-paragraph overview'. Differentiates from siblings like tsm_summarize or tsm_classify by being specific to git diffs.

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 says 'Helps the main model quickly understand large diffs', which implies usage context. However, no explicit when-not or alternatives to sibling tools are provided, but the specificity of the tool name and description makes the use case clear.

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