measure_coverage

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

With no annotations, description should fully disclose behavior. It states it measures coverage but does not mention whether it modifies files, requires permissions, performance impact, or that it is read-only. Insufficient transparency for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 with no redundancy. Clearly front-loaded with the key action and scope. Every word is meaningful.

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?

Tool has 5 parameters and no output schema. Description does not explain return value format (e.g., percentage, count, file list), which is important for an agent to use correctly. Also lacks performance or scope context. Incomplete for the complexity level.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. Description adds value by stating language-agnostic support (JS, TS, etc.) and clarifying that it measures docblocks, which goes beyond schema. Slightly above baseline.

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 clearly states verb 'measures' and resource 'documentation coverage (docblocks)' and distinguishes from siblings like verify_docs or find_docs. It also specifies language support, making the scope clear.

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?

Description implies usage for measuring docblock coverage, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like verify_docs or find_docs. No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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