get_all_diagnostics

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully covers behavioral traits: declares read-only, describes return format with severity values, and notes dependency on attached LSP servers and loaded buffers.

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?

Five sentences, front-loaded with purpose and read-only nature. Efficiently structured, though could be slightly shorter without losing key 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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description provides complete context: return format, severity meanings, and dependencies. An agent can fully understand the tool's behavior and output.

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?

No parameters exist (schema is empty), so baseline 4 applies. The description adds value by explaining return values, which compensates for the lack of parameters.

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 retrieves LSP diagnostics from all open buffers, specifying the resource and scope. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_buf_diagnostics' by mentioning project-wide vs. file-specific usage.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool (project-wide overview) and when to use 'get_buf_diagnostics' instead (specific file). Also notes it is read-only, guiding safe usage.

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