docs_analyze_project

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It describes the analysis but does not state whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has side effects. Key behavioral context is missing.

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 concise (two sentences) with the purpose front-loaded. The second sentence adds useful details without fluff, earning a high score for efficiency.

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?

The description lacks information about output format, return behavior, and potential blocking nature. Since there is no output schema, the description should compensate but does not provide sufficient detail for an agent to fully understand the tool's response.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning: it mentions extracted elements like classes and functions, but parameter-specific guidance is largely redundant with the schema.

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 verb 'Analyze' and the resources 'project structure' and 'code analysis' for documentation generation, distinguishing it from sibling tools that build, create, export, or generate specific documentation.

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 implies use when understanding the project before documentation generation but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like docs_generate_structure.

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