retryCompile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses only the precondition (file blocked on a missing dependency) and that the compile is re-run; it says nothing about side effects such as emitted artifacts, whether it blocks until completion, what happens if the dependency is still missing, or what result is returned.

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 no padding. The redundant protocol-method prefix costs a little, but the action and its precondition come first and the sentence ends immediately.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description should do more for a tool that triggers compilation. It leaves unresolved the path format, failure behavior, and result of the retry, which an agent needs before invoking it.

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 0% for the single 'file' parameter, so the description must compensate and does not: it never says whether 'file' is an absolute path, a workspace-relative path, or a URI, nor whether it must be an already-open document. Only the vague notion that it is 'a file blocked on a missing dependency' is conveyed.

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 action (compile again) on a specific resource (a file blocked on a missing dependency), which clearly separates it from the read-only navigation siblings (hover, definition, references, diagnostics). The '$/hol/retryCompile' prefix restates the tool name rather than adding information, but the verb+resource+precondition is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'blocked on a missing dependency' implies the triggering condition (retry after the dependency has been resolved), which is useful implicit guidance. However, it names no alternative tool, no exclusion (e.g., don't use for files that never compiled), and no prerequisite that the dependency now exists.

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