redcon_compress

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

No annotations exist, so description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns a compressed view with specific components (signatures, imports, relevant sections) and token savings. It implies a read-only operation with no destructive side effects. Could mention permissions or constraints, but the behavioral profile is sufficiently clear.

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, no filler. The first sentence defines the tool's output and benefit; the second gives an actionable usage rule. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so description should clarify return value. It explains the output contains signatures, imports, and relevant sections, and mentions typical token savings. This is sufficient for an agent to understand what to expect. Could add format details, but not critical.

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 75%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'one file' and 'task description' which aligns with path and task parameters, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. For max_tokens and repo, the description provides no additional meaning.

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 clearly states that the tool provides a 'Task-scoped compressed view of one file: signatures, imports and the sections relevant to the task', with token savings. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like redcon_overview (likely an overview) and redcon_search (search). The verb 'compress' and resource 'file' are specific.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Default to this INSTEAD of reading a whole file; fetch the full file only if the compressed view turns out to be insufficient.' This tells when to use and when to switch to an alternative, fulfilling the dimension perfectly.

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