Change Hotspots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and description adds important behavioral context: the requirement for repo_path if not in a git repo, and the defect correlation insight. No contradiction.

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?

Three concise sentences. Front-loads the core purpose, adds rationale, and ends with a critical usage condition. No unnecessary words.

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?

Provides clear purpose, usage condition, and defect correlation context. No output schema exists, but description omits what the output looks like. Otherwise complete for a read-only listing tool.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description only adds a conditional note on repo_path; does not significantly augment parameter meaning beyond what schema provides.

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 uses specific verb 'Find' and resource 'files that change most frequently', clearly distinguishing from siblings like churn and coupling. Adds context about defect correlation and actionable use.

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?

States to use for identifying files needing refactoring, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings. The repo_path condition is helpful but no comparison to other tools.

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