Get Supported Code Fixes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating read-only behavior. The description adds that omitting the file parameter causes an error ('No Project'), which is valuable behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction detected.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and adding critical usage guidance. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 (single optional param, read-only annotation), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage guidance, and a key error. However, it does not explicitly describe the return format (e.g., array of strings), which could be helpful but is not critical for a discovery tool.

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 the description doesn’t need to repeat param details, but it adds context about why the file param is needed ('to establish a project context') and the consequence of omission. This enhances understanding beyond the 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 clearly states what the tool does: 'Returns the list of all error codes that have available code fixes.' It uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('list of error codes'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by positioning it as a discovery tool before calling getCodeFixes.

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 explicitly says 'Use this as a discovery tool before calling getCodeFixes' and warns that omitting a file path will cause tsserver to throw an error. This provides clear context on when to use it and a prerequisite.

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