inspect_package

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

The description discloses the full scope of returned information (every class, interface, trait with signatures, properties, constants, docblocks). No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden well.

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?

Two front-loaded sentences that efficiently convey purpose, output, and usage context without extraneous 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 no output schema, the description fully explains the return value (classes, interfaces, etc.) and provides a usage hint. It is complete for a read-only inspection tool.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description itself does not add parameter details, so baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema already handles it.

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 it performs a deep-dive into a specific WPZylos framework package and returns detailed structural information (classes, interfaces, traits, methods, etc.). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'list_packages' or 'inspect_file'.

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 says 'Use before using a package,' providing a clear when-to-use hint. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for the agent.

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