Docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that output is a CLI reference in markdown or JSON form, which is useful context, but it discloses little beyond the annotation-covered safety trait.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb and resource come first and the output-format detail follows compactly.

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?

For a simple read-only documentation tool with annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is essentially complete. The only loose end is what the '--json' invocation means for a zero-parameter MCP tool, which is left unexplained.

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 tool takes 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4 and the schema cannot be enriched further. The description mentions a '--json' option that the empty schema does not expose, which is a slight mismatch but does not mislead about any actual parameter.

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 ('Print the full CLI reference'), so an agent immediately knows the outcome. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling 'cli' tool (or 'api'), leaving ambiguity about which reference-listing tool to pick.

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 parenthetical 'markdown or --json for AI/tooling consumption' hints at intended consumption modes, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance relative to siblings like 'cli' and 'api'.

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