Apply AST transforms

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'apply', providing no details on output format, side effects, reversibility, or required permissions. 'Apply' suggests mutation but unclear if it returns transformed code or modifies state.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb, no redundant words. Every part earns its place.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits return behavior, error conditions, and how the two modes interact. For a transformation tool, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It hints at two modes (inline transforms vs saved chain), which correspond to the 'transforms' and 'chainName' parameters, but does not explain the code parameter explicitly or the valid transform values. Lacks detail needed to correctly invoke.

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 ('Apply') with a clear resource (transforms/transform chain) and target (JavaScript). It distinguishes from siblings like ast_transform_preview (preview) and ast_transform_chain (save/manage chains) by focusing on actual application.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ast_transform_preview or js_deobfuscate_pipeline. The description implies usage (supply code and a transform), but does not state conditions or exclusions.

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