get_analytics_or_crash_config

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool reads files, checks packages, or returns a list. It does not indicate side effects, permissions required, or the nature of the result. The term 'Detect' is vague.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easily scannable.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and simple functionality, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could be improved by briefly stating what the output looks like (e.g., 'Returns a list of detected services'). The absence of any result description reduces 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 tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to explain parameters since none exist. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description is sufficient given the context.

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 'Detect' and clearly identifies the resource 'analytics/crash reporting services' with concrete examples (Unity, Sentry, Crashlytics, BugSnag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve specific configurations (e.g., get_firebase_config) by focusing on detection of presence.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention that this tool is for detecting which services are configured, while siblings like get_firebase_config retrieve detailed settings. No exclusions or when-not-to-use information is provided.

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