imports_cycles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering safety traits. The description adds the context of internal import graph and cycle detection, but does not disclose any additional behavioral characteristics beyond what annotations provide.

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?

One short sentence with no redundancy. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., front-loading 'Detect circular dependencies...' but it remains concise and immediately clear.

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?

While outputs are presumably defined by the output schema (not shown), the description omits parameter semantics and does not clarify input requirements. For a tool that requires project identification, this leaves a significant gap.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention or explain the two parameters (projectId, projectRef). The agent receives no guidance on what these parameters represent or how to fill them.

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 it detects circular dependencies in the indexed internal import graph, specifying the verb 'detect' and the resource 'circular dependencies'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like imports_deps (dependency listing) and imports_impact (impact analysis).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. It lacks explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions.

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