get_builder_report_index

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

The description explicitly states the tool is read-only and does not modify repository files, git state, release state, or configuration. This provides clear behavioral expectations. With no annotations present, the description adequately covers safety and side-effect transparency.

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 exceptionally concise with two sentences that each serve a purpose: first states functionality, second clarifies non-destructive nature. No extraneous information is present.

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?

Despite the tool having 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain the return value format, the meaning of 'bounded index', or how parameters affect the result. Given the complexity, the description is incomplete for an agent to effectively use the tool without additional guidance.

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 4 optional parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no detail about parameter meanings, formats, or constraints. The tool name and description hint at 'workspaceId' but do not elaborate on 'maxResults', 'workCardId', or 'phaseFolder', leaving the agent to guess their purpose.

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 is read-only and returns a bounded Builder Report index for configured workspaces. It also explicitly lists what it does not modify, making the purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools which cover different summaries and statuses.

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 implies use when needing a bounded Builder Report index for configured workspaces, but does not explicitly instruct when to use or not use this tool over alternatives like get_builder_report_summary. The sibling tools list suggests differentiation, but no direct comparison is provided.

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