get_code_analysis_results

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

With no annotations, the description states the ordering behavior ('최신순' = latest first) but does not explicitly disclose read-only nature, filtering behavior, or pagination. The term '조회' implies a read operation.

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?

A single sentence that is informative and free of redundant details.

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 is adequate for a simple list tool with fully documented parameters, but lacks explicit return-value information and alternatives, making it slightly under-specified for an agent without prior context.

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 four parameters have descriptions in the schema, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond naming the resource and ordering.

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 uses the verb '조회한다' (retrieves) with a specific resource ('code-analysis 결과 목록' from CodeVi backend), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that deal with metrics or smells.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool over alternatives like list_metric_analyses or list_smell_analyses, but the focus on code-analysis results implies its use for listing such results.

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