magento_trace_api

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral steps (parsing webapi.xml, resolving DI, reading method, checking di.xml) and states it returns the complete chain in one call. It does not mention any destructive actions, which is appropriate for a trace tool.

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 paragraph of three sentences, front-loading the purpose and listing steps without redundancy. Every sentence adds essential information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 explains the core behavior and output ('complete chain in one call') without an output schema. It covers the tool's functionality for three optional parameters. Minor gaps: no mention of error handling or response format, but adequate for a trace 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the 'url' parameter with examples, clarifying the 'method' enum as HTTP methods, and noting 'interfaceName' as an alternative. However, it could better clarify GraphQL usage.

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 traces a REST or GraphQL API endpoint from URL to implementation, detailing the specific steps (parse webapi.xml, resolve DI preference, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like magento_find_api by focusing on the full implementation chain.

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 for tracing API endpoints to their implementation, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., magento_trace_flow). The context of sibling tools hints at its distinct purpose, but explicit guidance is missing.

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