fs_stat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose 'Read-only', which establishes the safety profile, but says nothing about what happens on a missing path, symlink handling, permissions, or what metadata is returned.

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 very short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity edges into under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, minimal coverage is defensible, but the description omits what 'stat' actually returns (size, type, timestamps) and error behavior on missing paths, leaving gaps an agent would need to probe.

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 0% and the single parameter 'path' has no description in either the schema or the description beyond 'a single path'. No format, relative-vs-absolute, or workspace-relative semantics are given.

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?

States a specific verb (stat) and resource (a single path) scoped to the workspace, which is more precise than a generic 'get info'. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling fs_read, but the 'stat/single path' phrasing implies metadata rather than content.

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 versus fs_read, workspace_info, or search, and no prerequisites or conditions given. The agent must infer that stat is for metadata inspection.

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