describe_file

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the valuable detail that a local model is invoked (implying latency and non-deterministic output), but it does not clarify that the result is only a suggestion and that nothing is renamed or moved.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to the meaning and nothing is repeated from structured fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the tool is low complexity with one parameter. However, in a workflow with siblings like plan_tidy, apply_plan and undo, the definition omits where this step fits and that its output is advisory rather than applied, leaving the agent to guess.

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 0% and the single 'path' property has no description, so the description must carry the load. 'One file' does imply the path points to a single file rather than a directory, but it adds no format, relative-vs-absolute, or error semantics beyond 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?

States a specific action (ask the local model) and a specific output (a better name and folder) scoped to 'one file', which an agent can distinguish from folder-level siblings like scan_folder and plan_tidy. It is clear but never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings or explains how its per-file suggestion relates to plan_tidy/apply_plan.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus scan_folder or plan_tidy, nor any mention of prerequisites or ordering within the tidy workflow. The only hint is the phrase 'one file', which implies per-file scope but leaves the agent to infer it.

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