change_directory

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the primary effect but omits side effects such as validation behavior, persistence across calls, interaction with the directory stack, or failure modes. This is a state-changing operation, so more transparency is expected.

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 zero wasted words. It clearly communicates the core action and effect, achieving maximum brevity without losing meaning.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), and the description covers the primary function. However, given the sibling tools for directory navigation, it omits context about how this relates to push_directory/pop_directory and whether the change is persistent or scoped. This leaves a minimal but acceptable level of completeness.

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?

The schema description covers 100% of the parameter, providing detailed guidance on accepted path forms (absolute, relative, ~). The description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema carries the burden. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Changes') and resource ('active directory') with a clear scope ('for relative path operations'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_directory (read) and push_directory/pop_directory (stack-based navigation), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for setting the base directory for subsequent relative path operations, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over push_directory/pop_directory or provide exclusions. No alternative tools are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the context.

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