codacy_overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that 'issues' returns server-rendered ECharts pie charts and instructs to present them as-is, plus cache-control hint. No contradiction.

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?

Description is verbose and repetitive; same '[INSTRUCTIONS]' and similar phrases for each action. Could be condensed to one clear workflow without duplication.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return values (counts, pie charts) and provides workflow. Lacks error handling details but sufficient for a read-only overview 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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters. Description repeats action options but adds workflow context for 'categories' vs 'issues'. Does not add significant new meaning beyond schema for other parameters.

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 clearly states the tool returns category-level counts or aggregated issue overview with pie charts. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., codacy_issues.list, codacy_pull_requests) by focusing on high-level overviews and drill-down guidance.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use each action: 'categories' for counts to drill down with codacy_issues.list, 'issues' for pie charts to identify high-impact areas. Also instructs not to recalculate pies. Clear alternatives and exclusions.

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