ReSharper Cleanup Code

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

Annotations already carry destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the 'in place' phrase in the description confirms the mutating nature rather than introducing new information. The description does not contradict the annotations and adds a small amount of context, but it does not disclose side effects like overwriting formatting or requiring a backup.

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 one short, direct sentence that names the action, target, and in-place mutating effect. Every word contributes, with no filler or redundant rephrasing.

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 schema handles the complex path-matching and profile-default semantics, and annotations cover the unsafe/idempotent behavior. The only missing piece is a description of return values or post-condition reporting, but no output schema exists and this is not essential for invoking the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the property descriptions are rich: files explains path matching, wildcards, splitting, and failure behavior, while profile explains defaults. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so it meets the baseline for an already fully documented schema.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Run') with a specific resource ('ReSharper code cleanup') and states the observable effect ('reformat and normalize files in place'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings: cleanup modifies formatting, whereas resharper_inspect analyzes issues and resharper_reset_cache manages the cache.

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 clearly frames the tool as the choice for reformatting and normalizing files in place, which gives an agent usable context for selection. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the behavior is distinct enough from the sibling tools that the usage intent is unambiguous.

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