axint.project.syncVersion

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive. Description adds that it updates specific project files, performs no network calls, and respects a dryRun flag. This adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 contains redundant phrasing ('Use this after... Use: use after...') and could be more streamlined. It is not overly long but has minor repetition.

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 4 parameters, no required params, and an output schema, the description covers the main use case, effects, and file scope. No significant gaps remain for the intended use.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. However, the description refers to parameters as 'cwd' and 'targetVersion' while the actual parameters are 'targetDir' and 'version'. This inconsistency could confuse agents, reducing clarity.

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 updates Axint-owned project-pack version hints after upgrades, naming specific files like .axint/project.json, AGENTS.md, etc. This differentiates it from sibling tools like axint.upgrade, which performs the upgrade itself.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this after axint.upgrade or npm/pip upgrades', providing clear context. Lacks explicit exclusions for other scenarios, but the use case is well-defined.

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