trace_module_deps

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses 'always available' as a behavioral trait but omits details on side effects (none expected), authentication needs, rate limits, or output format. It provides some context but not enough for full transparency.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word contributes meaning; no redundancy or noise.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should clarify return values or format, but it does not. For a tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, the description is too sparse to fully inform the agent about what to expect.

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%, baseline 3. The description does not elaborate on parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides, such as how 'direction' or 'max_depth' behave. It adds no additional semantic value.

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 'Trace module-level dependencies' and 'Shows which files/modules depend on which,' providing a specific verb and resource. It also hints at distinction from siblings by noting 'coarser but always available,' which differentiates it from finer-grained tools like trace_callees.

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 'coarser but always available' implies a trade-off and suggests using this when fine-grained traces are unavailable, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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