depguard_audit

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It lists actions (download, scan, check, analyze, verify) but does not mention side effects like network requests, resource usage, or whether it modifies anything. Lacks explicit disclosure of behavioral traits.

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 front-load the purpose and usage. No superfluous words; every part adds value.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and parameter semantics. No gaps remain for an agent to interpret.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining version parameter with example and default behavior ('If omitted, audits the latest version'), and clarifies targetLicense default ('default: MIT').

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 'Deep security audit of a single npm package' and lists specific actions (downloads tarball, scans for malware, checks vulnerabilities, analyzes install scripts, verifies license). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like depguard_audit_bulk and depguard_audit_deep.

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 says 'Use when you need full details on a specific package' and provides condition for version parameter. While it doesn't directly mention alternatives, the sibling tool names imply the scope, making usage clear.

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