Cheat Sheet

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value beyond these by setting expectations about the output size (~150 tokens) and its nature as a snapshot, which helps the agent anticipate the format. No contradiction with annotations is present.

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, compact sentence that conveys purpose and usage in under 20 words. It is front-loaded with the key phrase 'repo snapshot' and the qualifier 'fast orientation', with no filler or repetition.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it tells the agent what it does, why to use it, and what to expect in terms of output size. The only minor gap is that the exact contents of the snapshot are not specified, but that is acceptable for a simple cheatsheet tool.

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 provides a full description for the 'path' parameter, including its meaning ('Absolute path to the repository root'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add anything about the parameter, but the schema already tells the agent everything needed. 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 produces a '~150 token repo snapshot' for 'fast orientation', which conveys its purpose as a quick codebase overview. It distinguishes itself by emphasizing speed and orientation in an unfamiliar codebase, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with deep-analysis siblings like full_diagnose or audit_360.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Fast orientation for an agent entering an unfamiliar codebase' tells the agent exactly when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of the full exclusion guidance.

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