xcode_build

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It warns about long execution time ('Can take minutes to hours - do not timeout') and mentions destination behavior. However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., build artifacts) or output format.

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, each carrying weight: first states purpose, second gives key usage note and warning. No fluff, front-loaded, efficient.

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?

No output schema is present, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success, logs). It does include a critical timing warning and default behavior, which partially compensates. For a build tool, more detail on output would strengthen 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 already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for each parameter. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the purpose. Baseline score 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 verb 'Build' and the resource 'a specific Xcode project or workspace with the specified scheme'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like xcode_build_and_run, xcode_test, and xcode_clean by focusing solely on the build action.

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 provides a usage hint about destination defaulting to active destination but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like xcode_build_and_run or xcode_test. The context is implied rather than explicit.

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