antigravity_check

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'Check,' which implies a non-mutating operation without stating it explicitly. It does not disclose whether any configuration is changed, whether a network call is performed, or what happens when discovery is unavailable.

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?

The description is a single sentence that names the tool's purpose without filler. It is front-loaded with the action and the three specific check targets, making it easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple, with one optional parameter and an output schema, but the description still omits key context: when to choose this over sibling tools, how cwd affects the result, and whether any setup or login is needed. The agent can probably invoke it, but not with full confidence about side effects and scope.

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?

The single parameter cwd is optional, has a null default, and no schema description; the tool description never mentions it. While 'cwd' is a recognizable abbreviation, the description adds no meaning about how it affects the check, so it fails to compensate for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 names a specific action ('Check') and enumerates three concrete targets: AGY discovery, local login-visible models, and the selected Gemini model. It conveys the tool is a read-only status/diagnostic operation, which separates it from sibling tools like antigravity_delegate and antigravity_job, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to run this check versus using antigravity_delegate or antigravity_job, and no mention of prerequisites such as whether login is required. The intended context is only implied by the verb 'Check' and the tool name.

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