tldr_change_impact

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, how it determines affected tests, or any side effects. The schema hints at git usage but description omits this detail, leaving behavioral assumptions unclear.

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, front-loaded with the core action and usage guidance. No redundant words, every sentence adds value.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimal. It conveys purpose and usage but lacks details on parameter interactions, expected output, or examples. Adequate but not thorough given the complexity.

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% with all parameters described in the schema itself, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the tool finds tests affected by changed files, with a specific verb 'Find' and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'tldr_impact' by specifying 'changed files' and provides context for use before committing.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use before committing to know what to test,' giving clear context for when to use. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the guidance is specific and actionable.

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