Diff since version

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

With no annotations, the description must reveal behavioral traits. It mentions 'report' and 'pulls', but does not clarify if the tool is read-only or has side effects (e.g., modifying state). No information on authentication, rate limits, or error handling.

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 sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and context. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 low complexity (1 param), the description lacks details on return values, error cases, and side effects. It does not guide when to use this vs. sibling tools like get_consumer_component. The 'auto-sync primitive' hint is insufficient.

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 only parameter 'version' is explained as a 'consumer version', which adds some meaning beyond the schema's bare type string. However, no format, constraints, or examples are given. Schema coverage is 0%, but description only minimally compensates.

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 checks for a newer contract given a consumer version and pulls only the delta. It uses specific verbs and identifies the resource (contract version) and action (diff). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_data_contract which fetch full contracts.

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 usage for synchronization with the phrase 'Auto-sync primitive', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided.

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