tap_fix

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description says 'repair' which implies mutation, creating a contradiction. The description also does not clarify whether the repair is actually applied or just proposed. This lack of clarity is problematic.

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 very concise: four sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, front-loading key information. Structure is efficient.

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 explains the process and return shape partially, but given no output schema, it should provide more detail on the structure of diagnostics and patches. It also omits what 'repair' actually does, which is critical given the annotation contradiction.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the process (runs tap.doctor) and return shape but does not provide additional meaning for individual parameters like name, site, or timeout beyond what the schema already gives.

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 verb ('diagnose and repair') and resource ('broken tap'), and distinguishes from sibling tool tap_doctor by indicating it builds on it.

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 says 'Use when tap.doctor returns verdict=broken.' This tells when to use. It also mentions tier differences (free vs Pro) affecting capabilities. Missing explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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