flutter_breaking_changes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, whether both query and version can be combined or are mutually exclusive, what the result format looks like, or any limitations on the search behavior. This is a significant gap for a query tool.

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 efficient at two sentences with zero wasted words. The key verb, resource, and usage hint are all front-loaded in the first sentence. It could arguably be more structured, but there's nothing extraneous.

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?

This is a relatively simple query tool with 2 optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core purpose and a use case. However, it doesn't clarify parameter interaction semantics (can query+version be combined?), which is important for an agent to invoke correctly. No output schema means the agent has no guidance on what results look like.

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%, both parameters (query, version) are described in the schema with example values. The description adds the dimension framing (by version or keyword) that complements the schema, but doesn't clarify whether the two parameters can be used together or are alternatives. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 function with a specific verb ("Query") and resource ("Flutter breaking changes"), and identifies two query dimensions (by version or keyword). It distinguishes from siblings like flutter_docs and flutter_widget_lookup, though it doesn't explicitly name them or contrast against them.

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 mentions the tool is "Useful for migration planning," which provides some context for when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, though the sibling list suggests there are more specific lookup tools available.

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