watch_repo

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

The description mentions Rust-backed performance and incremental DB updates, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, resource usage, long-running nature, or how to stop watching (requires 'unwatch_repo').

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 for purpose and two lines for parameters, front-loaded with the main action, concise with no wasted words.

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 description covers purpose and parameters, but omits output format, error behavior, and whether the watch runs indefinitely or requires termination. Sibling 'unwatch_repo' suggests start/stop pattern, which is not mentioned.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description adds value by explaining 'repo_path' and 'exclude_dirs' meanings, compensating for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions.

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 a specific verb ('Start watching') and resource ('repository for file changes'), clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'unwatch_repo', and states the effect (incrementally updates graph DB).

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 watching a repo for file changes, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it compare with alternatives like 'index_repo' or 'unwatch_repo'.

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