find_todos

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

The description provides useful behavioral details about execution timing and the on_timeout parameter, explaining how to handle long-running tasks. However, it omits fundamental behavior such as the search scope (files, directories), whether it is read-only, and the output format. Without annotations, this is only partial transparency.

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 a single paragraph that is reasonably concise but front-loaded with 'Kali Agent MCP tool:' which is unnecessary. The structure mixes general behavior with parameter guidance, but it is not overly verbose.

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 tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the core output or what the tool searches for. The heavy focus on execution timing leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's primary function.

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 description indirectly covers on_timeout and timing parameters but does not explain path or limit. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds minimal value beyond default values. The agent would lack understanding of key parameters like path and limit.

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 fails to state the primary purpose of the tool, which is to find TODO comments in code. It only discusses execution timing parameters, relying on the tool name to hint at functionality. This lacks specificity about what 'find_todos' actually does.

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 such as find_files or search_text. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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