Repository Snapshot

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

Description adds 'bounded' (max files limit), 'read-only' (matches readOnlyHint), and specific contents (delivery signals, symlink/UTF-8 counts, optional Git metadata) beyond annotations. No contradictions. Could mention that path is restricted (filesystem roots rejected) which is in schema but adds behavioral context.

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 sentence of 15 words, front-loaded with key qualifiers ('Bounded, read-only inventory'). No redundant or filler content. Every word adds 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?

Given an output schema exists, description does not need to detail return values. It covers main aspects: structure, counts, optional Git metadata. However, it omits mention of the 'path' restriction (rejects filesystem roots, UNC paths require override) which is in schema but not in description.

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 description coverage is low (33% only for 'path'). Description mentions 'bounded' hinting at maxFiles but does not explain any parameter meaning or provide examples. For a tool with 3 params and low schema coverage, description should compensate but does not.

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?

Description clearly states it's a bounded, read-only inventory of repository structure, delivery signals, symlink/non-UTF-8 counts, and optional Git metadata. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sdlc_directory_tree and sdlc_read_file by specifying the scope and contents. However, 'delivery signals' is vague and not explained.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like sdlc_directory_tree or sdlc_list_changes. The description implies use for comprehensive repo snapshot, but does not state exclusions or when to prefer other tools.

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