verify_lockfile

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions scanning but not output format or behavior upon finding suspicious packages (e.g., returns list or errors). Lacks disclosure of read-only nature or side effects.

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 with front-loaded verb 'Scan'. Efficient but omits expected output details; still earns high score for brevity.

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?

Lacks output schema and doesn't describe return values. For a scan tool, agent needs to know if result is a list of issues or a boolean. Incomplete for making informed invocation decisions.

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 67% (2 of 3 params described), but description adds no extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., no hint on how to set format enum or optional ecosystem). Baseline for partial coverage is 3, but description fails to compensate.

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?

Description clearly states action (scan lockfile), target (direct + transitive deps), and purpose (detect hallucinated/typosquatted/suspicious packages). Differentiates from siblings by specifying scanning entire lockfile vs. individual package checks.

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?

Explicitly advises to call this before running install and to use instead of trusting LLM-generated lockfiles. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but context from sibling tools implies differentiation.

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