ba_impact

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses non-destructive nature ('Creates nothing') and lists report components, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or output format.

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, front-loaded, no wasted words; every sentence adds essential meaning.

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?

Tool has 2 params, no output schema, no annotations; description explains purpose and inputs but lacks output structure or return format, leaving gaps for agent invocation.

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 has 2 params with 0% coverage; description links 'target ids' to 'targets' param but does not explain 'projectRoot' (path or ID?), so only partial value added 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('report') and resource ('blast radius, conflicts, severity, consequences, and change questions'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by stating 'For a mid-project change' and 'Creates nothing.'

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 specifies use case ('mid-project change') which implies when to use, but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools, though it is clear enough for the context.

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