get_codebase_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get directory overview', which implies a read operation but does not confirm safety, side effects, or any behavioral details. A 2 is appropriate as it adds minimal transparency beyond the basic purpose.

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 very concise, with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more descriptive about what 'directory overview' entails. Still, it is appropriately brief for a deprecated tool.

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 no parameters, an output schema (which handles return value documentation), and deprecation status, the description is complete. It provides the essential fact of deprecation and points to the correct replacement.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description is not required to add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The baseline score for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not detract from that.

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 states it is deprecated and directs to use 'get_context', while still clearly indicating its purpose: 'Get directory overview.' The verb 'get' and resource 'directory overview' are specific, and the deprecation distinguishes it from the recommended sibling.

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 explicitly mentions deprecation and tells the agent to use 'get_context' instead, providing clear when-not-to-use guidance and a named alternative.

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