PhpCodeArcheology

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions what is returned (coupling metrics, dependency directions) but omits safety profile (read-only vs mutation), error behavior (class not found), or performance characteristics.

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?

Single efficient sentence front-loaded with the action. Em-dash effectively segments the return value details. No redundant phrases.

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?

Adequate for a 2-parameter tool: compensates for missing output schema by describing return contents. However, gaps remain around direction parameter semantics and behavioral details (error handling, safety) that annotations would normally 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 has 100% coverage but descriptions are tautological ('Parameter: class_name'). Description implies class_name identifies the target class via 'specific class', and hints at direction parameter values via 'outgoing'/'incoming', but doesn't explicitly map direction parameter to these options or explain if it filters results.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Returns dependency information for a specific class') and specifies return contents (outgoing dependencies, incoming usage, coupling metrics). Lacks explicit differentiation from siblings like get_impact_analysis or get_graph that also analyze relationships.

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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives provided. No mention of when to prefer this over get_impact_analysis or get_graph for relationship analysis.

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