analyze_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only lists return values and does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether side effects occur, or error behavior. For an analysis tool this is a notable gap.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists outputs. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no nested objects) and the description's enumeration of expected return categories, the description is largely complete. The lack of behavioral details (e.g., read-only nature) is a minor gap, partially offset by the absence of an output schema and annotations.

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 input schema already provides 100% description coverage for the single filePath parameter. The description adds only that the file is a React/TSX file, matching the schema. It does not provide path format, suggested usage, or clarifying examples beyond 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 it analyzes a single React/TSX file and lists specific outputs (components, hooks, imports, exports, directive), making the purpose concrete. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling analysis tools, but its scope as a general single-file analyzer is distinct enough.

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 phrase 'Analyze a single React/TSX file' implies when to use it (when you need a broad file overview), but it does not mention alternatives or explicitly exclusions. No guidance is given on when to prefer sibling tools such as find_component_usages or analyze_hook_deps.

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