get_topological_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states 'No API call needed' and implies a read operation (returns files). It also mentions the reindex prerequisite. While it could detail side effects or permissions, the description is sufficiently transparent for a simple read tool.

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 two concise sentences: first states the core function, second explains usage and requirements. No unnecessary words or repetition. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates key information.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete. It covers purpose, when to use, prerequisite, and that no API call is needed. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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%: the only parameter 'files' has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds overall context (reindex, no API) but does not further elaborate on the parameter beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns files in dependency order (dependencies before dependents), which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_dependencies and get_dependents by emphasizing the topological ordering and its use for safe refactor ordering.

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 explicitly tells when to use: 'determine the safe order to modify files during a refactor' and mentions a prerequisite ('Requires a prior reindex'). It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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