get_compile_errors

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

With readOnlyHint already present, the description adds valuable behavioral context: it persists across Console.Clear() and returns structured, typed data. This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies what to expect, though it does not mention staleness or whether it triggers compilation.

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?

Extremely concise: three short statements that deliver key facts immediately. Every phrase earns its place—purpose, persistence trait, and output format—without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers what is returned (compile errors with file:line:column) and the format (structured, typed). It omits details like whether the result is an array or if error messages are included, but for a simple read-only tool this is reasonably complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed, and there is no parameter semantics gap to compensate for.

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 indicates the tool provides compilation errors with file:line:column details, and the name 'get_compile_errors' implies retrieval. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting persistence across Console.Clear() and structured/typed format, though the lack of an explicit verb ('get' is only in the name) keeps it a step below a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The unique behavior 'Not lost on Console.Clear()' hints at a use case (e.g., after clearing the console) but does not explicitly state when to choose it over related tools like compile_preflight or get_console.

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