Topos Changeset Assessment

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description adds that it reads from git and working tree, writes nothing, and details specific flags like complexity_relocated_within_file and project_regression.

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?

Five sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, usage, behavior, error handling, return type. No redundant information, front-loaded with the most critical 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?

Given the tool's complexity (multi-file assessment, rollup, flags, dependencies), the description covers read-only guarantee, use cases, alternative tools, error conditions, and return type, making it self-sufficient.

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 100%, providing descriptions for each parameter. The tool description adds context about baseline_ref's role in file comparison, which is helpful but not extensive.

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 assesses a multi-file changeset against a git baseline, distinguishes from sibling tool topos_assess_worktree_change for single files, and specifies the read-only nature.

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 tells when to use this tool (module split or multi-file edit) versus the single-file alternative, and provides guidance for blocked COMPOSABLE state by calling topos_generate_depgraph first.

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