Run PHP Insights

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which are consistent with generating a score. However, the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the purpose, such as potential side effects if the fix parameter is used.

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 a single sentence in Turkish, concise and to the point. It lacks structure but contains no superfluous text.

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 tool has multiple optional parameters (including fix that may modify files) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value (the score format) or the effect of the fix parameter.

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?

All three parameters are fully documented in the input schema with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context for parameters.

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 states that the tool generates an overall score on code quality, architecture, style, and complexity using PHP Insights. This specifies the verb (generate) and resource (score), but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like run_phpcs or run_phpmd.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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