tldr_arch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must inform about behavior. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, what side effects exist, what output format is returned, or any limitations. The description is overly vague on behavioral traits.

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 with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous details.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about what the tool returns or how it works. It mentions 'shows high-level architecture' but lacks specifics. For a simple tool with one parameter, it is minimally acceptable but incomplete.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter 'path' with a description. The tool description adds context about 'from call patterns' but does not further describe the path parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high coverage.

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 it detects architectural layers from call patterns and shows high-level architecture. The verb 'detect' and resource 'architectural layers' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like tldr_structure, which might also deal with architecture, but the mention of 'from call patterns' provides some distinction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings, such as tldr_structure or tldr_context. It does not mention prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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