axint.project.syncVersion

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: it updates specific files (.axint/project.json, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, rehydration docs), mentions dryRun behavior, and states no network access. No contradiction with annotations (idempotentHint, non-destructive).

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 two sentences plus a brief usage note, clearly structured with purpose, when-to-use, and effects. It is concise but not overly terse.

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 description covers purpose, usage context, files affected, and dryRun behavior. With an output schema present, it does not need to describe return values. It is sufficiently complete for selection and invocation.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description mentions dryRun suppresses writes, but this is already in schema. No additional parameter meaning beyond schema defaults and enum values.

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 updates Axint-owned project-pack version hints after an upgrade, specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like axint.upgrade and axint.project.pack.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this after axint.upgrade or npm/pip upgrades' and 'use after package upgrades', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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