get_blast_radius

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool traverses calls, imports, and inherits relationships up to maxDepth, which is transparent. However, it does not mention safety aspects like read-only behavior or potential performance implications.

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 a single, succinct sentence with no filler, front-loading the key action and result.

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?

Given two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sparse. It fails to specify the output format, inclusion of starting node, or edge cases. Sibling tools like get_definitive_path suggest more context is needed for selection.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that maxDepth limits the traversal depth, but 'identifier' is only implied as a starting node without further detail. This adds minimal meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 specifies the verb 'Return' and the resource 'reachable nodes through calls/imports/inherits', clearly indicating the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_definitive_path or get_node_context.

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 versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusion criteria or context hints.

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