worker.diff

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

The description mentions parallel execution and the criteria (sha256, size, existence), implying a read-only comparison. However, without annotations, there is no explicit statement about destructiveness, side effects, or performance characteristics, leaving some uncertainty.

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, focused sentence that conveys the core purpose with no superfluous words. It is optimally concise.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the brief description leaves significant gaps: no explanation of return format, parameter usage, or how the tool differs from similar siblings like validate.diff. More context is needed for reliable agentic use.

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 input schema has three parameters (left, right, maxFiles) with zero description coverage. The description does not explain these parameters or map them to the mentioned sha256/size/existence criteria, forcing an agent to guess their meaning.

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 it performs a diff of files/directories using sha256, size, and existence. The verb 'diff' and resource are specific, but it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like validate.diff, which may have overlapping functionality.

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 like validate.diff or file.read. An agent would need to infer usage context from the name and description alone.

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