cli_reference

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

No annotations are given, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool retrieves help/listings, which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm idempotency, rate limits, or response type. Pagination behavior is implicit via parameters but not described.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Get', and includes an alternative use case ('or list commands by category'). No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

Given 5 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally complete. It explains what the tool does but does not describe the output format, error behavior, or constraints. For a simple reference tool, this may suffice, but additional context would improve completeness.

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 value by providing concrete examples of commands (run-all, plan) and clarifying that category is for listing, which enriches understanding beyond the schema descriptions.

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 uses specific verbs 'Get' and 'list', names the resource 'Terragrunt CLI command help', and provides examples of commands (run-all, plan, apply). It also distinguishes from siblings like function_reference or get_hcl_config_reference, which are different types of references.

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 implies usage for obtaining CLI command help or listing commands by category, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings (e.g., function_reference for HCL functions). No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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