Scan FTC Project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's lack of mutation disclosure is acceptable. It adds value by listing what is scanned (SDK, libraries, etc.), but does not mention any other behavioral traits like performance or side effects. Adequate but not exceptional.

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 sentence plus a usage note, with no wasted words. The verb 'Scan' is front-loaded, efficiently conveying the action and scope.

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 simplicity (1 param, output schema exists, siblings clear), the description covers the tool's purpose and timing. It lacks explicit mention that projectPath must be an existing directory, but overall provides sufficient context for a straightforward scan 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?

The schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'projectPath' with a description. The tool description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the tool scans an FTC project for specific elements (SDK version, libraries, OpModes, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings like search_knowledge and validate_ftc_code. The verb 'scan' with resource 'FTC project' and listed specifics define a unique purpose.

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?

The instruction 'Use at session start' provides clear timing guidance. While alternatives are not explicitly mentioned, the siblings are distinct in purpose, reducing confusion. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are given, but the context is sufficient for a simple tool.

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