get_index_overview

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context about the tool being a snapshot of aggregated data (composition of v1.46/v1.50/v1.55 aggregations) and the output fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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 that efficiently convey key information: version, purpose, output fields, and use case. No fluff; front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 tool's simplicity (read-only snapshot, 2 parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and its context. Helpful for an agent to decide when to use it.

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 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (repo and top_n). The main description does not add further parameter details, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it provides a 'single-call repo snapshot' listing specific fields (doc_count, section_count, etc.) and explicitly says 'Use for what is this repo at a glance?'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on individual entities (e.g., get_section, list_docs).

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 description explicitly states the use case ('what is this repo at a glance?') and mentions version requirement ('v1.56+'). While it doesn't include when-not-to-use, the parameter description for top_n hints at alternatives (get_all_tags / get_all_roles) for complete listings.

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