composerAnalyzer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral information. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation with no modifications, which is a basic signal, but the description does not explicitly disclose side effects, prerequisites like Composer being installed, or failure behaviors.

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, concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action ('List') and clearly states the resource ('Laravel project dependencies'), making it optimally sized for quick understanding.

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 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose; the schema handles parameter semantics. It does not describe the return value format, but this is not essential for a listing tool. Overall, it is sufficiently complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Both parameters (dev and filter) have complete descriptions in the input schema, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description itself adds no additional context about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, keeping the score at the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('Laravel project dependencies from composer.json and composer.lock'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like migrationAnalyzer or frontendScanner, which deal with different concerns.

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 implies the tool is for listing dependencies, but it does not specify when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions, such as when to include dev dependencies or how to leverage the filter option. No alternative tools are mentioned as appropriate or inappropriate.

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