Index ACS source

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

No annotations exist, so description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions reading files directly and being offline, but lacks details about error handling, performance, or side effects. Basic functionality is stated, but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences. Front-loaded with action and result. Every sentence provides value: first sentence defines purpose and output, second adds behavioral context. 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?

Low complexity (1 param, simple output), but no output schema exists. Description hints at return values (scripts, functions, numeric defines) but doesn't specify format or structure. Incomplete for an agent to interpret results.

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?

Only one parameter 'dir' with 0% schema description coverage. Description does not explain what 'dir' should be (path format, required/optional, default). Completely lacking parameter 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?

Description states it parses .acs files to return symbol counts (scripts, functions, numeric defines). Verb 'parse' and resource 'directory of .acs source files' are clear. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like find_acs_symbol, but the purpose is specific.

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?

Only implicit guidance: 'Reads files directly; no game needed' suggests offline use, but no explicit when to use vs alternatives or exclusions. No mention of prerequisites or situations to avoid.

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