heddle_impact_radius_get

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It hints at two modes (normal and NO_SNAPSHOT) and mentions 'completeness+staleness', but lacks details on side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or output characteristics. It does not clarify if the tool is read-only.

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 very short (two sentences) and uses no fluff, but it is overly terse and includes jargon ('downstream affected entities', 'changed-set-only answer') that may confuse. It front-loads the core concept but lacks clarity.

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 (10 parameters, nested objects, output schema), the description is severely insufficient. It does not explain parameters, output format, or how to switch between modes. It fails to provide a complete understanding of the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides no information about any of the 10 parameters (repo, rev_range, etc.) or how to use them. The description only mentions high-level output modes without linking to parameter values.

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 mentions 'Downstream affected entities from stored dated snapshots' which gives a general idea of what the tool does, but lacks a clear verb and does not distinguish from siblings like 'blast_radius' or 'changed'. The term 'downstream affected entities' is vague.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'blast_radius' or 'heddle_change_list'. It mentions 'mandatory completeness+staleness' and 'NO_SNAPSHOT' mode, but does not explain the context or when each mode is appropriate.

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