adr_diagram

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation), required permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only or mutating. The description carries the full burden but adds minimal behavioral context.

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 with no redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded but could benefit from additional details without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool with multiple parameters (format, diagram_type, project_path) and an ambiguous generate/retrieve behavior. It lacks explanation of how these parameters affect the output, making the tool incomplete for correct agent invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. While the schema provides types and defaults, the meaning of 'diagram_type' and 'project_path' remains unclear. The description should compensate for the low coverage but fails to do so.

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 states it generates or retrieves a diagram for an ADR, specifying verb and resource. However, the 'or' creates ambiguity about whether it always generates or can retrieve existing diagrams. Among sibling tools focused on CRUD operations, this one is distinct but the ambiguity reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like adr_read or adr_export. There is no mention of appropriate contexts or when to generate vs retrieve, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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