faf_formats

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

Description uses jargon 'fills stack slots' which is ambiguous and could imply side effects, despite readOnlyHint being true. No explanation of what happens during discovery or if any state changes. Contradiction with readOnlyHint is not explicit but unclear.

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?

Description is short but includes emoji and marketing language that could be trimmed. The core message is conveyed, but conciseness could be improved by removing fluff.

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?

No output schema, and the description does not specify what the tool returns or its format. The tool's behavior beyond discovery is unclear, leaving the agent without sufficient information to handle the result.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema, and the description adds value for the 'path' parameter by explaining it sets session context. Schema coverage is 100%, so additional context is minor.

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 clearly states it discovers all formats in the project, which is a specific action. The mention of 'fills stack slots' adds context but is somewhat unclear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools focused on other tasks.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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