get_quality_guide

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only mentions version-scoping for spring-boot domain. Omits side effects (likely read-only), return format, and any special permissions or restrictions.

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 fluff. But excessively minimal; could add more context without becoming verbose. Adequate for conciseness but lacks substance.

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?

Does not describe the return value (guide content, format), how to use the output, or how the workspaceRoot parameter affects behavior. Leaves gaps for a tool with 2 parameters and no output schema.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description does not explain either parameter beyond an implicit reference to domain (spring-boot). The workspaceRoot parameter and enum values are left entirely to the 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?

Clearly states it fetches one quality guide and notes a domain-specific nuance (spring-boot version scoping). Distinguishes from likely sibling list_quality_domains. However, does not differentiate from other siblings like explain_pattern or review_architecture.

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?

Implies usage for fetching a single guide, but provides no explicit context on when to use versus alternatives like explain_pattern or review_architecture. No 'when not to use' guidance.

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