audit_inventory_guidance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it provides guidance, but does not mention whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or what 'guidance' entails (e.g., textual steps, examples).

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 that efficiently conveys the purpose and scope. It is front-loaded with the phase name and action.

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?

The description is sufficient for a no-parameter tool but lacks details about the output or how guidance is presented. With no output schema, more context on the format (e.g., text, list) would improve completeness.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The baseline is 4 for no parameters, and the description is adequate.

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 it provides guidance for the AUDIT_INVENTORY phase, specifying the action 'analyze code and catalog changes'. This distinguishes it from sibling guidance tools focused on other phases (e.g., iterate_guidance, setup_guidance).

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 implies usage during the AUDIT_INVENTORY phase but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned despite multiple sibling guidance tools existing.

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