sc_diff

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must convey side effects. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no mutations, which is clear. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or that it does not modify the working copy, though this is strongly inferred.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant information. It directly states the action and target without any fluff or unnecessary details.

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 simple read-only operation, the description is sufficient. It identifies the action and target, but it does not specify the output format (e.g., unified diff) or any additional context like branch or revision, which might be expected. However, the absence of an output schema reduces the need for such detail.

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 tool description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. The schema already defines the 'path' parameter with a description 'File path to diff.' The description of the tool itself does not elaborate on the parameter's semantics, so it relies entirely on the schema.

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's function: 'Get the diff for a modified file in source control.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and specifies the resource ('diff') and context ('modified file in source control'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sc_checkout or sc_status.

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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where a diff is needed or differentiate from other source control read operations. Usage context is entirely implicit.

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