list_dependencies

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

The word 'transitive' is a useful behavioral disclosure, but with no annotations, the description should also state that the tool is read-only, what the output structure is, and any performance considerations. It does not.

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 extremely short (5 words) but under-informative. It is not a full sentence and reads more like a label. Conciseness should not come at the cost of completeness.

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 tool with one required parameter, no annotations, and an output schema, the description fails to explain what the output is, how to interpret transitive dependencies, or what constitutes a component. It is grossly incomplete.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the 'node_ref' parameter. The parameter's purpose and format are left entirely to inference.

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 'What a component depends on (transitive)' clarifies that it lists dependencies transitively, but 'component' is vague and the verb is implied from the tool name. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_dependents' only by being the inverse, but doesn't explicitly state this.

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 like 'list_dependents' or other tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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