project_info

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

Declaration that the tool is read-only and never modifies files is explicit. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and addresses the key behavioral trait for a diagnostic 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?

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose, include usage guidance, and note read-only nature. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Description covers input, purpose, and usage context well. Lacks detail on the returned report structure beyond listing categories, but given no output schema, this is a minor gap. Still adequately complete for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the 'dir' parameter with example and default. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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 it runs 6-category diagnostics on a BackGen-generated project and returns a structured report. It lists specific checks (Node.js version, npm, .env, etc.) and distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'doctor' by noting it is read-only, while doctor has auto-fix capability.

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?

Explicitly says to use this tool before or after making changes to verify project state, and directs to 'doctor' for a focused health check with auto-fix. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with alternative.

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