faf_doctor

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

Description adds specific details about the types of issues reported (missing files, slots, config issues) and that it returns a fix. Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction; description enriches the read-only behavior.

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 explains function, second provides usage guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 diagnostic tool with no output schema, description adequately explains return value (prioritized checklist) and types of issues. Complete for agent invocation.

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?

Only one parameter 'path' with schema coverage 100%. Schema already describes it as 'Project path. Sets session context.' Tool description does not add further semantics beyond implying it is the project to diagnose.

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?

Clearly states the tool diagnoses a project.faf setup, reports specific issues (missing files, empty/weak slots, config issues), and returns a prioritized checklist. Distinct from sibling tools like faf_check or faf_score.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when your score is low and you need to know why.' Provides clear context but no mention of when not to use or alternatives.

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