Resolve Tauri documentation snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that results come from a checked-in corpus and are deterministic (i.e., offline, stable), but says nothing about failure behavior for unknown identifiers.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource arrive in the first few words. Nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter read tool this is nearly sufficient, but there is no output schema and the description never characterizes the returned 'metadata', leaving an agent unsure what the resolution yields. The identifier-to-metadata contract is the tool's whole purpose and remains underspecified.

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 the schema itself already provides example forms ('tauri, tauri@2, or an immutable snapshot identifier'). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema supplies, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb (resolve) and resource (Tauri documentation identifier), and the phrase 'deterministic metadata from the checked-in corpus' distinguishes it from a search tool. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with its siblings query_tauri_docs and search_tauri_docs, and 'metadata' remains undefined.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool rather than the sibling search/query tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusion conditions. An agent must infer that a known identifier should be routed here instead of to search_tauri_docs.

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