get_buf_diagnostics

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

With no annotations, description fully covers behavior: read-only nature, error on non-open buffer, return format with fields and severity enum, and empty list case. No contradictions.

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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with purpose and safety, then parameter details, usage hint, and return format. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

With no output schema, description fully explains return format, severity values, and empty list. Covers error condition and prerequisite. Complete for a single-parameter tool with clear sibling context.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, description explains 'file' parameter as path relative to Neovim's cwd and references get_state for context, adding meaning beyond schema's type definition.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get LSP diagnostics for a single Neovim buffer' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tool get_all_diagnostics by specifying scope (single file vs project-wide).

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 (single file) and when to use get_all_diagnostics (project-wide). Also notes prerequisite: buffer must be open in Neovim, and error case if not.

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