inspect_flake

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

Without annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the tool returns structured facts, enumerates the types, and clarifies that undetermined facts return null/'unknown'. It does not mention side effects or dependencies, but for a read-only inspection tool this is adequate.

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 sentences, front-loaded with key functionality, and includes important details (list of facts, behavior for unknowns) without unnecessary words. It is highly efficient and structured.

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?

An output schema exists (not shown but indicated as true). The description covers purpose, usage timing, and output contents. For a single-parameter tool with siblings listed, the context is sufficient for an agent to use 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'flake_uri' only implicitly via 'config repo' and does not describe the parameter's format, default behavior, or relationship to the repo. The description leaves ambiguity about how the parameter is used.

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's purpose: return structured facts about a config repo. It lists specific items (hosts, homeConfigurations, etc.) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing 'in one call' and positioning it as an onboarding/orientation tool.

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 advises when to use the tool: 'Run this before onboarding a repo or when orienting in an unfamiliar config.' It also clarifies behavior for unknown facts (null/'unknown'). While it does not provide explicit when-not or alternatives, the context is clear.

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