faf_context

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

Description claims ability to set path (mutation) while annotation readOnlyHint: true indicates read-only. This is a direct contradiction. Additionally, description fails to resolve this inconsistency.

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 concise sentences. First sentence states action and return value. Second sentence provides usage context. 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the dual behavior (set/show) and recommends when to call. Missing output schema but return value is mentioned. However, the contradiction with annotations undermines completeness.

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% and its description matches the tool description. The description adds no new information beyond the schema's field description. 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?

Description explicitly states the verb and resource: 'set or show the active project path'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that it resolves for later faf_ calls.

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?

Clearly advises calling once at session start to target the right project. Implicitly suggests when not to call (when context is already set). No explicit exclusions but sufficient guidance.

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