Review Documentation

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. Adds that scoring is 'computed deterministically from headings/word counts/topic coverage,' which is useful. Doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior but 'Score' implies it; some side-effect info missing.

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, first sentence encapsulates purpose, second adds a key usage context. Every word earns its place.

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?

Covers purpose, method, output, and usage context for a simple tool. Lacks parameter details and explicit return structure, but acceptable for a 1-param tool.

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 0% and description does not mention the sole parameter projectPath. Agent must infer from name; no path format or meaning explained.

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?

Description clearly states 'Score a project's existing documentation' with specific metrics (coverage/quality/consistency 0-100) and output (missing sections, recommendations). Distinguishes from sibling generator tools by noting it works against hand-written docs only.

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?

States 'Works against hand-written docs alone — no other generator tool needs to have run first,' giving clear context for when to use. Doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but implies use for review, not generation.

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