aggregate_debt

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what side effects might occur, performance implications, or the shape of the returned data. The wording 'aggregate' suggests read-only but it is not explicit.

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, front-loaded sentence of nine words with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the core purpose, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what 'debt' and 'streak views' mean in terms of return values and any limitations. It omits these details, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke without making assumptions about output format and behavior.

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?

Only one parameter 'paths' exists, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's phrase 'across multiple local repositories' implies that 'paths' contains the repository paths, but it does not explicitly map the parameter or specify path details (e.g., relative/absolute). It adds partial meaning but does not fully compensate for the lack of schema docs.

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 the specific verb 'aggregate' with clear resources 'debt and streak views' and specifies the scope 'across multiple local repositories'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like find_todos or get_streak_status by focusing on multi-repo aggregation rather than individual TODO ops.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool (aggregating debt/streak data across multiple repos) but does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusion criteria. This meets the bar for clear context without exclusions.

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