find_exceptions

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions the age cap ('capped by the configured maximum') and grouping options, which adds some transparency. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only, nor does it describe side effects or permissions. The inclusion of an undocumented 'ctx' param in the description may confuse agents.

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 relatively concise with a clear purpose sentence and structured Args/Returns sections. However, it includes 'ctx' which is not in the input schema, introducing potential confusion and unnecessary content. The information is front-loaded but marred by the irrelevant parameter.

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 tool with two parameters, the description covers the grouping behavior, return type, and parameter constraints. The presence of an output schema fills gaps about return structure. The only shortcoming is the unexplained 'ctx' parameter, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the age cap and elaborating on the group_by enum options (e.g., 'file' groups by filename). This clarifies the schema descriptions, earning a 4.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves exception counts grouped by file path, function, or type. The verb 'Get' and resource 'exception counts' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'find_exceptions_in_file' which likely focuses on a single file.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'find_exceptions_in_file' or 'get_error_count'. No usage context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer without support.

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