find_unused_code

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It describes what it detects and the prerequisite, but does not explicitly state it is read-only (implied by 'find') or mention side effects, performance, or error conditions.

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?

Concise and well-structured: title, usage examples, output description, detection list, prerequisite. Every sentence is informative 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?

Covers purpose, usage, output format, detection categories, and prerequisite. Lacks error handling details and output schema (since none provided). Adequate for the tool's complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by showing usage examples with the optional filePath parameter and default behavior (includeFields/methods default true).

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 finds unused private methods and fields, listing specific detection categories (unused private methods, unused private fields, write-only fields). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_references or find_method_references.

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?

Provides two usage examples and explicitly states that load_project must be called first. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools or give when-not-to-use guidance.

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