cluster_of_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Get architectural cluster data' without disclosing any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or return behavior. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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 is concise with a single sentence that is front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, so while it earns its place, it is under-specified for the task.

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 complexity of the domain (architectural clustering) and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about output, use cases, or how it complements other tools, making it 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for the parameter 'file_path', and the description adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides. The parameter is simply named in the description without elaboration, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'architectural cluster data' for a file path, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'architecture_summary' or 'impact_neighbors'. It is clear but lacks specificity about what 'architectural cluster data' means.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent receives no help in selecting this tool over siblings.

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