parsePrd

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

No annotations exist, and the description gives no behavioral clues (e.g., whether the tool is read-only, whether it modifies state, or what side effects occur). The agent cannot infer anything beyond the name.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-specified rather than concise. It fails to convey essential information. A concise description would efficiently communicate the purpose and usage.

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?

Even for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It omits the meaning of PRD, the expected file format, and the result of parsing.

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 single parameter 'filePath' has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the tool description adds no meaning—it neither explains what file format is expected nor what the output of parsing is.

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 'Parse PRD' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without specifying what PRD stands for (e.g., Product Requirements Document) or what the tool actually does with it. It lacks a clear verb-resource combination.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., read_file, search_files). There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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