resolve_dependencies

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks details on side effects, authorization needs, or return format. It only states it 'returns the full resolved dependency list' without specifying the data structure or confirming it is a read-only operation.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and usage instruction, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

With one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's core purpose and when to use it. However, it omits the return format (e.g., array of strings) and any behavioral traits, which could lead to incomplete understanding for the agent.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage of the single parameter, and the description adds context by labeling it 'companion spec namespace aliases' with an example. This clarifies the intended input beyond the schema's basic description.

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 resolves companion spec namespace aliases into a dependency list for the YAML `namespaces:` section. The verb 'resolves' and resource 'dependency list' are specific, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_namespaces.

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 instruction 'Always call this before generating the namespaces block' provides a clear usage context. However, it doesn't mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, which would improve guidance.

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