list_angular_standalone_components

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the inventory content, not behavior. It doesn't disclose that it's a read-only listing, whether it requires a loaded project (though schema implies this), or error conditions. The description is purely descriptive of output, not operational behavior.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds a useful Angular version note. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description doesn't fully specify the return format beyond 'inventory' and the standalone/non-standalone split; it mentions composition imports but not field details or any caveats. It's adequate for a simple list tool but could be more explicit about output shape.

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 'name' is already well-described in the schema as 'Name or path of the loaded project' (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional semantic detail about the parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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 it's a component inventory distinguishing standalone (with composition imports) from non-standalone (NgModule-dependent), directly addressing the tool's name and differentiating from siblings like 'list_angular_components'. It specifies the scope as Angular 19+ with a note about default standalone, giving a specific resource and categorization.

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?

Provides context that this is relevant for Angular 19+ where standalone is default, implying it's for assessing standalone adoption. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to prefer this over list_angular_components or exclude other tools, so it's clear but not fully prescriptive.

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