find_disposable_misuse

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: two patterns, return format (summary + per-violation list with severity/location/method/snippet), scope limitations, and static analysis nature. No contradictions.

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?

Concise at about 4 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and patterns. Could be slightly more structured but efficiently conveys all necessary information.

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?

Despite no output schema or annotations, description is self-contained: explains what it does, how results are structured, scope, and limitations. No missing gaps for a parameterless tool.

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?

Tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline score of 4 applies; description adds no parameter info but is not needed.

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?

Clearly states it detects IDisposable/IAsyncDisposable leaks and describes two specific patterns with severity levels. Differentiates well from sibling tools which focus on other code analysis aspects.

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 describes when to use (detecting disposable misuse) and what it does not cover (test projects, constructors, fix suggestions). Lacks explicit comparison to alternatives but contextually sufficient.

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