fullscope_skeleton

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses compression behavior, savings range, and weakness on flat files. Does not mention non-read actions (none exist), so transparency is high.

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?

Four sentences, each adding value: tool function, strengths, usage guidance, alternatives. No fluff, well front-loaded.

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 one parameter and no output schema, description compensates by explaining return format (signatures only, expand handles) and usage context. Could mention error handling but not necessary.

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?

Single parameter file_path has 100% schema description coverage ('Absolute path to the file'). Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, meeting baseline expectation.

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's function: showing only function/class/method signatures with imports/exports, replacing implementation with expand handles. It also contrasts with siblings like fullscope_context and Read tool, establishing distinct 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?

Explicit when-use ('understand a module API surface') and when-not ('NEVER use for files you plan to edit'), plus direct alternatives (fullscope_context for details, Read for editing).

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