depguard_audit_deep

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

With no annotations, description covers key behavior: recursive crawling and aggregation across the full graph. Slightly limited by not describing output structure, but sufficient for agent understanding.

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 well-crafted sentences: first defines action and resource, second provides usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded critical info.

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?

Description clarifies the tool's recursive nature and aggregation purpose. Lacks output structure details but overall complete for a read-only audit tool; schema covers inputs fully.

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 covers 100% of parameters. Description adds no extra semantic detail beyond schema, such as effect of maxDepth or targetLicense, so baseline 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?

Description uses specific verb 'audit' and resource 'full transitive dependency tree', clearly distinguishing from siblings like 'depguard_audit' which likely covers only direct dependencies.

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 states when to use: 'when you need to know the total attack surface, not just direct deps', providing clear context and contrast with alternatives.

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