ck_git_status

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

Description declares 'Read-only and side-effect free — no findings are created or modified', which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). Adds context about what the tool does not affect, enhancing transparency beyond 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?

Three sentences: purpose/output, read-only declaration, usage guidance. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with the primary function.

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?

Covers purpose, safety, usage guidelines, and alternatives. Output schema exists but is not shown; description adequately describes return types. Only minor gap is parameter documentation, but overall complete for a read-only tool.

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 50%; only project_root has a description. Session_id is not described in schema or in the tool description. The description does not explain the role or format of session_id, leaving ambiguity. Parameter semantics are weak.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves git working tree status correlated with CK governance findings, listing specific outputs (staged/unstaged/untracked files, blocked/open findings). Differentiates from sibling tools ck_git_diff and ck_git_commit by mentioning alternatives.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('before ck_git_commit') and when to use alternatives ('prefer ck_git_diff for diff content; prefer ck_git_commit when ready to commit'). Provides clear context and exclusions.

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