compile

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that errors block push while warnings do not, and verbose flag reveals all errors/warnings. However, it does not mention side effects or permissions. Given the tool's nature, this is good but not exhaustive.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded purpose, then behavioral specifics. No redundancy.

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 an output schema existsaine, the description covers error handling and return value. It lacks explanation of 'project' parameter, but overall it's sufficient for a compile tool. Complexity is moderate.

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 0%, so description must explain parameters. It explains 'verbose' but 'path' is only implied as 'root owning path' and 'project' is completely absent. With 3 parameters, this is insufficient.

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 phrase 'Compile the root owning `path` and return a digest' provides a specific verb (compile) and resource (root owning path). It is distinguishable from siblings like render or read, though 'root' is ambiguous without context. The purpose is clear but not fully specified.

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 mentions error behavior but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives or provide exclusions. It implies use when you need to compile and check for blocking errors before pushing, but no explicit comparison with siblings.

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