magento_complexity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool analyzes complexity and rates files, implying a read-only operation. No contradictions exist, and for an analysis tool, the behavioral description is adequately transparent.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, containing no extraneous information. Every word adds value, clearly stating the tool's purpose, metrics, and use case.

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 moderate complexity, the description covers the key aspects: what it analyzes (complexity metrics), what it produces (hotspots and ratings), and when to use it. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by the description of outputs, though a mention of return format 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 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (path, module, threshold). The description does not add new parameter-specific details beyond the schema, so a baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool analyzes code complexity with specific metrics (cyclomatic complexity, function count, line count) for PHP files. It identifies hotspots and rates files, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on searching, finding, or tracing Magento elements.

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 includes a use case ('Use for refactoring prioritization'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, though siblings are diverse and no other tool appears to perform complexity analysis.

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