tldr_slice

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only covers the basic purpose. It does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the slice is static or dynamic, performance implications, or any side effects. The description is minimal for a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema.

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-formed sentence that clearly conveys the tool's purpose. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., line numbers, code snippets). It only says 'find all lines', which is vague. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('find') and resource ('all lines that affect a specific line'), clearly indicating it performs program slicing. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like tldr_cfg or tldr_dfg, the unique purpose of slicing is evident.

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 states to 'use to understand what influences a value or statement', implying a usage context. However, it provides no guidance on when not to use this tool or how it compares to siblings like tldr_impact or tldr_cfg, lacking explicit alternatives.

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