agda_infer_type

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether inference is read-only, how async/job handles work, what timeout or defer behavior means, whether raw logs are returned, or what rewrite modes do.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though its brevity leaves important details unstated for a complex 8-parameter tool.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and only 50% schema coverage, the description is not complete enough. It omits async/job behavior, rewrite options, timeout/raw-log controls, and the read-only nature of type inference.

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?

There are 8 parameters with only 50% schema description coverage. The description clarifies that workspace and goal determine scope and names expression, but it omits the rewrite enum, async job behavior, timeoutMs, includeRaw, and deferAfterMs semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: infer the type of an expression. It also names the scope, workspace or goal-local, which helps distinguish the context. However, it does not differentiate from siblings such as agda_typecheck or agda_normalize_expression.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage through the words "infer the type," but does not explain when to choose it over agda_typecheck, agda_normalize_expression, or other query tools.

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