sync_gitignore

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

Discloses that the tool edits `.gitignore`, preserves user-added lines, returns added/removed entries, and supports `dry_run` for preview. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and does it well.

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?

Two sentences containing all critical information without redundancy. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage and output details.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns, and how to preview changes.

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 100%, and description adds value by explaining the `dry_run` parameter's effect and usage, going beyond the schema's basic type/default.

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?

Description clearly names the resource (`.gitignore`), the action (synchronise the managed block), and distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the exact context (`event4u/agent-config`).

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('after upgrading the package or when generated paths are being tracked by mistake') and mentions the `dry_run` option. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but sufficient for typical usage.

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