plan_context_footprint

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

The description accurately reflects the read-only nature (readOnlyHint=true) and adds behavioral context about progressive-discovery savings, context compaction, and proof-preserving recommendations. No contradictions with annotations.

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 efficient sentences that front-load the purpose and list key outputs without any wasted words or redundancy.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's purpose and outputs. However, without an output schema, it could be more helpful by specifying the structure of the reported metrics (e.g., numeric values, recommendation format).

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?

All 7 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions, hence baseline score of 3.

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?

Clearly states that the tool estimates MCP schema and feedback-context footprint, listing specific outputs (savings, recommendations). Distinguishes itself from sibling planning tools by focusing on footprint estimation.

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?

Indicates usage 'before loading large manifests into an agent prompt', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for similar purposes.

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