map_infrastructure

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions 'regenerate all artifacts' but does not explain if this is destructive, what happens to existing artifacts, or any side effects like data overwrite.

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 very concise at one sentence. While efficient, it could include more detail without being verbose, so it is not perfect.

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 the tool potentially performs a heavy operation (full discovery and regeneration) with no annotations, the description lacks important context like scope, duration, or whether it can be run concurrently. The presence of an output schema helps but not enough.

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 'live' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and is not mentioned in the tool description. The agent has no clue what this boolean does.

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 the tool runs 'full discovery (static + live)' and regenerates artifacts, specifying the action and output. However, 'cirdan-out artifacts' is domain jargon that may reduce clarity for agents unfamiliar with the project.

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 'fingerprint_system' or 'query_infra_graph'. No prerequisites or context for when the tool is appropriate.

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