Docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: no API call is made, no project is required, and the reference deliberately omits groups like integrations, secrets, API keys and settings. The caveat that the tool list is the authority on what exists is a meaningful disclosure of incompleteness.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and three compact sentences with no filler. Minor redundancy: "Print the full CLI reference" and "Prints a hand-written reference" restate the same action, and "Returns JSON" overlaps with the earlier "--json for AI/tooling consumption".

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?

No output schema and no parameters, so the description must stand on its own, and it does: it describes the content source, the cost profile (no API/project), and the known coverage gaps. The only gap is the unexplained markdown-vs-JSON selection given there is no input parameter for it.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the schema baseline is 4. The description mentions a markdown/--json output mode that is not represented in the schema, which is a minor mismatch but does not obscure parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: printing the full CLI reference, with the markdown/--json variants named. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling `cli` tool, so an agent must infer the division of labor between them.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the parenthetical "for AI/tooling consumption" hints at the audience, and "without calling the API or needing a project" implies a cheap, context-free lookup. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to `cli`, `api`, or `fetch`.

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