sc:index

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has side effects. 'Browsing and discovery' suggests read-only, but not explicit. Missing behavioral traits beyond the short phrase.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with key terms. However, it omits necessary detail for a tool with three parameters and no output schema. Conciseness is good but not at the expense of clarity.

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?

Given no output schema and moderate complexity (three params, one required), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how to use the flags together, or what 'intelligent discovery' entails. Leaves the agent guessing about expected 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters (input, flags, agent). The description adds minimal value: only mentions the command version (SuperClaude v4.0.9) and flag options already in schema. No new semantic context beyond schema.

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?

Description states 'Command catalog browsing and intelligent discovery' which gives a general purpose but lacks specificity. It doesn't clearly differentiate from sibling tools like sc:analyze or sc:explain, which also involve discovery. The mention of 'Category: meta' helps, but the core action is vague.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The 'Priority: RECOMMENDED' hint is present but doesn't compare with alternatives. The agent must infer context from the category and siblings.

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