vts_admin

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that git and p4 are read-only, but fails to describe side effects for other operations (e.g., setup, config, index). It also lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or return values.

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 overly dense, packed into a single sentence with semicolons and em-dashes. It lacks clear paragraph breaks or structured formatting. Although it front-loads the purpose, the density harms readability.

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?

Given the tool has many sub-operations and no output schema, the description should explain each op's behavior and return value. It provides only brief one-liners for ops like 'savings_reset' and 'discover', leaving ambiguity. The agent would need to infer behavior from operation names.

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% with descriptions for both op and params. The description adds value by explaining the parameter structure (put op's args in params) and providing examples (e.g., {"argv":["status"]} for git, {"since":30} for discover), which enhances understanding beyond the 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 states the tool is for admin/meta ops of vs-token-safer, listing specific operations like setup, config, savings, etc. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are typical IDE features. However, the description is dense and uses abbreviations without explanation, slightly reducing clarity.

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 implies the tool is rarely needed reflexively and notes that git/p4 are read-only and refuse mutations. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusions for other operations.

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