detectUnusedCode

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint=true, indicating no destructive side effects. The description adds that it uses tsc or ts-prune, which suggests it may be slower or require a project setup, but does not elaborate on other behavioral traits like file access, performance impact, or output format. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the essential information without waste. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and method. It lacks details on the return format or limitations, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of readOnlyHint, it is largely complete.

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 does not add new meaning beyond the schema. The description mentions the purpose but not the parameters. The schema already documents includePatterns (reserved) and maxResults. The description's contribution is minimal, so baseline 3.

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 'Find' and the resource 'unused exports, locals, parameters', specifying the mechanism (tsc --noUnusedLocals or ts-prune). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like findReferences or findImplementations, which search for used references.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as findReferences or diagnostic tools. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where it should not be used.

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