inspect_minestom_build

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds specific context about what the tool inspects (dependencies, plugins, etc.) and that it provides 'interpretation' beyond raw file reading, which is valuable supplementary information.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the usage guidance. It is concise, with no redundant 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 presence of a comprehensive input schema, annotations, and an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, inputs, and outputs. It specifies the scope of inspection (Gradle/Maven, dependencies, plugins, etc.), making it complete for the agent.

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 single parameter repoRoot has a clear description in the schema ('path to the Minestom workspace'). The overall description does not add additional parameter-specific semantics, so with 100% schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool provides 'Gradle or Maven specific interpretation' for a Minestom workspace, listing specific outputs like dependencies, plugins, wrapper commands, and variables. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like inspect_minestom_environment or lookup_minestom_api.

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 starts with 'Use this when you want...' providing clear context for when to invoke. It does not mention when not to use or explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling tools serve as implicit alternatives for other tasks.

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