inspect_minestom_environment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing what the scan includes (build files, source patterns, etc.) and that it roots at repoRoot or current directory, which goes beyond annotations.

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, efficient sentence that quickly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with usage guidance and avoids unnecessary words, though it is slightly long.

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 has an output schema (so return format is documented elsewhere) and one optional parameter, the description adequately covers the tool's capabilities and scope (build files, source patterns, etc.). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for repoRoot. The tool description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema's field description, which already explains the default and path nature. Baseline 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 performs a Minestom workspace scan, listing specific components (build files, source patterns, entrypoints, libraries, run/ subdirectories). It distinguishes from siblings like inspect_minestom_build 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 begins with 'Use this when you want...', providing explicit guidance on when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative sibling tools.

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