get_architecture_trends

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by explaining that snapshots are saved automatically and that no prior indexing is needed. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which are consistent with the description. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second describes return values, third explains data source and prerequisites. No wasted words.

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 the simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers return values (historical snapshots with overall and per-dimension scores) and data source, making it complete for an agent to understand usage.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description mentions 'trends over time' which aligns with the 'since' parameter but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: 'View architecture health score trends over time. Returns historical snapshots with overall and per-dimension scores.' This distinguishes it from sibling tool get_architecture_health which likely returns current state.

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 explains that snapshots are saved automatically by 'deepwiki check' and 'deepwiki update', and that no prior indexing is required. This tells the agent when to use the tool for historical trends. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, though context from siblings implies it.

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