p4_diff

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

The verb 'Show' implies a read-only operation, which is useful given that no annotations are provided. However, the description does not disclose output format, behavior for unopened or non-existent files, default handling of the summary flag, or whether a server connection is required. Some transparency exists, but significant gaps remain.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every phrase contributes meaning: 'Show differences', 'workspace files', and 'opened or local vs depot' all add specificity.

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?

All parameters are documented in the schema, but there is no output schema and no description of the return format or how the summary flag changes output. The absence of usage guidance and behavioral details also leaves the description somewhat incomplete, though the tool itself is relatively simple.

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 is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by clarifying the comparison direction ('workspace files ... vs depot') and the 'opened or local' distinction, which helps interpret the files parameter. It does not add detail about summary or workspacePath, but the schema already covers those adequately.

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 states a specific verb ('Show'), a clear resource ('differences for workspace files'), and a precise scope ('opened or local vs depot'). This distinguishes it from p4_diff2, which compares depot-to-depot files, even though the sibling is not named.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like p4_diff2, p4_status, or p4_opened. No exclusions, prerequisites, or selection criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the description alone.

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