git_blame

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses execution timing behavior but omits other key traits: whether it reads or modifies files, permissions needed, or side effects. The output format is not mentioned, though an output schema exists.

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 concise and fairly structured, but it wastes space with 'Kali Agent MCP tool:' and front-loads execution details before stating the tool's function. It could be organized better.

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's complexity (9 parameters, output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks a clear purpose statement, does not mention prerequisites (e.g., being in a git repository), and fails to explain how the output schema relates to the result.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains timing parameters (expected_runtime_seconds, timeout_seconds, etc.) but neglects core parameters (path, file_path, start_line, end_line). Their meaning and usage are left to inference.

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 does not state what git_blame does. It assumes the agent knows the git blame command, but only mentions execution timing. The purpose is ambiguous; a clear statement such as 'Show who last modified each line of a file using git blame' is missing.

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 provides guidance on timing parameters and on_timeout options but does not indicate when to use this tool versus other git tools (e.g., git_log, git_diff). No explicit alternatives or context for selection are given.

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