Compose previews — hierarchical tree

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by detailing the output structure (hierarchical with modules, files, functions, variants, totals, orphans), which goes beyond annotations. 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds essential nuance about grouping and summary. Every word earns its place.

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 two optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives a good picture of the result structure (hierarchical tree, grouping, totals, orphans). It is mostly complete for a listing tool, though it could mention what happens if no maxFiles is specified (default 5000, but that is in schema).

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides (the schema describes maxFiles and moduleFilter adequately).

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 that the tool returns a hierarchical tree of Compose previews organized by modules, files, functions, and variants, including grouping of multiple annotations and a totals summary. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like devilge_list_compose_previews (which likely returns a flat list).

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 implies it is for exploring previews in a tree structure but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like devilge_list_compose_previews. No guidance on exclusions or specific scenarios is provided.

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