get_stack_outputs

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: outputs come from local IaC files, not the deployed stack. No annotations are provided, so the description must carry this burden, which it does well. It could mention potential file parsing issues but is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences with clear purpose, usage, and exclusion. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. Highly efficient.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the fields returned, making it complete for a parameterless tool. Sibling tools are more specific, and this description sufficiently contextualizes its role.

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?

No parameters exist (schema coverage 100% vacuously), so the description adds no param info beyond what the schema provides. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 it returns stack outputs and cross-stack exports from local IaC files, listing specific fields (name, description, export name, raw value). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying it works with local files only, not live resources.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to call (wiring cross-stack references, needing exported names) and when not to call (for live resource attributes), providing clear context for appropriate use.

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