deep_script_analysis

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It does not mention that this is likely a read-only analysis, any performance implications, or what happens with results. The phrase 'deep analysis' hints at thoroughness but lacks details about side effects or output behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns its place by conveying the main purpose, though it omits needed elaboration. This is concise but not necessarily well-structured for complex information.

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 is too sparse for a tool that likely performs a comprehensive analysis. It does not explain return values, expected output format, or how it relates to other analysis tools. Given the complexity of 'deep analysis' and the absence of an output schema, the description leaves significant gaps.

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 only parameter, includeMinified, is a boolean with default false, but the description does not explain its meaning or effect. The phrase 'all JavaScript' could imply inclusion of minified files, but it does not explicitly connect to the parameter. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate.

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 a specific action ('Perform deep analysis') on a clear resource ('all JavaScript') with a defined goal ('for animation patterns'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_element_animations (element-specific) and trace_animation_execution (execution-focused), though it leaves what constitutes 'animation patterns' somewhat open.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like extract_animation_code, get_element_animations, and analyze_lenis offer more specific scopes, but the description does not mention these or any exclusions. The context is implied by the word 'all' but not explicitly stated.

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