analyze_global_scripts

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'analyze', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose safety, side effects, or dependencies. The description is too brief to provide transparency beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence, no unnecessary words. However, it is so concise that it sacrifices clarity, not earning a 5.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema, so the output format is handled. But the description does not explain the input context (e.g., where global scripts come from) or how the analysis results should be used. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, but for a parameterless tool, the baseline is 4. However, it could clarify what is being analyzed (e.g., currently loaded scripts), which is missing, so 3.

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 'Analyze global scripts usage patterns' which specifies the action and resource, but it is vague about what 'global scripts' refers to and what the analysis entails. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze_bdd_context' but lacks specificity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'analyze_existing_patterns' or 'generate_test_template'. It does not mention prerequisites or context for use.

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