check_stale

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool checks last update time and code sync, but does not detail how the sync comparison works or any potential side effects. This is adequate but could be more precise.

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?

A single, well-crafted sentence that front-loads the action and is easy to parse quickly. No wasted words.

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 description lacks information about the output format or structure. With no output schema, the agent cannot anticipate the result type (e.g., list of files, report). This is a significant gap for a check tool.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters (dirPath, maxAgeDays, compareWithCode) with default values. The description echoes the staleness criteria (30 days, out of sync) but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 'sniffs out' and clearly identifies the resource as 'documentation that has gone stale'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like check_style or catch_bugs by focusing on staleness criteria (30+ days or code mismatch).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as verify_docs or sync_documentation. The description implies usage for stale doc detection but does not provide criteria for choosing it over siblings.

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