compile_setup

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

The description contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=true by stating that it adds a pre-commit hook, which modifies the repository. This is a serious inconsistency that misleads about the tool's behavior.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then expands with relevant details about the hook, safety, and environment variables. It is concise but could omit the final sentence 'Ask me...' as it adds little value.

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 covers what the tool does, how the hook works, safety, and prerequisites. With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. It is complete for a setup tool, though it could mention teardown or checks that siblings cover.

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%, and the description repeats the schema's parameter description without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Set up compile mode for the current git repo'. It specifies that it adds a pre-commit hook to compile changed source files into compiled memory, distinguishing it from siblings like compile_status and compile_stale.

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 says 'Run this once per repo' and 'Ask me set up compile mode anytime', implying it's a one-time setup. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like compile_status or compile_stale, leaving some ambiguity.

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