format-grammar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior. It discloses the tool's output in detail (grammar name/type, rule list, imports, options, issue summary with counts). The verb 'Display' implies a read-only operation, providing implicit transparency. It does not, however, explicitly state that no modifications are made or discuss any edge cases.

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 concise and well-structured, opening with the main purpose, then 'When to use,' then a bulleted list of returned items. Every sentence earns its place; no redundant content.

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?

For a display tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it covers purpose, usage context, and return values. Minor gap is not specifying input requirements (e.g., at least one of from_file or grammar_content) or how the tool handles missing input, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to decide and invoke.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema; it does not explain when to use from_file vs grammar_content or relationship between them.

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 the tool 'Displays a structured summary of the grammar with proper formatting,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like generate-summary or export-as-markdown, which may also produce grammar summaries.

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?

It provides a 'When to use' section saying to use it for a high-level overview of grammar organization and structure. This gives clear context, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or reference sibling tools.

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