scan_changed_files

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It describes the diff-aware behavior (default returns only new findings on added lines) and the toggle to disable it. Lacks mention of side effects or auth needs, but scan implies 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?

Two sentences, no waste. Front-loaded with purpose and ideal uses. Every word 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?

No output schema, but description implies return type (findings on changed lines). Lacks detail on output structure, but given the tool's simplicity and no required params, it is mostly 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?

Schema coverage 100% so baseline 3. Description adds meaning: explains 'diff_aware' toggle and default 'base' value. Clarifies 'base' accepts branches, commits, or HEAD~N. Adds value beyond basic schema.

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 states it scans files changed since a git ref, with specific verb 'scan' and resource 'changed files'. Distinguished from sibling tools like scan_file (single file) and scan_staged (staged changes) by focusing on a diff base.

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?

Explicitly suggests use cases: PR checks, pre-push hooks, incremental CI. Does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer proper usage.

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