Help

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

The description explains the behavioral context of each action beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint). It discloses that actions like 'editor_rules' generate files and install hooks, and 'enable_bundle' modifies tool state, aligning with the idempotent and non-destructive hints.

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 efficient sentence that starts with the core purpose and lists actions. It is front-loaded but could benefit from breaking down actions for better readability.

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 complexity of 16 parameters and multiple actions, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on which parameters apply to which actions, expected outputs, and usage examples. The absence of an output schema further limits 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it only lists actions without detailing parameter usage for each.

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 explicitly states 'Utility and help' and enumerates distinct actions (tools, auth, version, etc.), making the tool's purpose clear and differentiating it from sibling tools that are more specialized.

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 lists actions with brief explanations, implying when to use each (e.g., 'tools' for listing available tools, 'auth' for current user). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives.

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