ide_overview

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It describes the content of the overview (program, tests, devices) but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it returns a simple reference or an interactive guide. This is adequate for a documentation tool, but not rich.

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?

One concise sentence front-loads the purpose and ends with a strong directive. No wasted words; every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a reference/overview tool with no parameters or output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool contains and when to use it. It does not explain the format of the overview, but that is not critical for this tool type.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. Per the baseline rule for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description adds no parameter information because none is needed.

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 what the tool does: it explains how to build a complete ikide project covering program, tests, and devices, and how they fit together. This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from siblings like ik_overview or ik_tutorial.

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?

It explicitly says 'READ THIS before writing tests or devices,' giving clear when-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, which prevents a 5.

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