codebase_qa

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. Mentions 'indexed context' and 'local LLM' but omits critical behavioral details: read-only status (implied but not stated), output format, whether answers are streamed or batched, and dependencies on indexing state.

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?

Single 9-word sentence with zero redundancy. Front-loaded with action ('Answer') and properly structured with mechanism following purpose. Every word earns its place.

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?

With zero annotations, 3 parameters, no output schema, and 20+ sibling tools, the description is insufficiently rich. It lacks guidance on prerequisites (index availability), output structure, and differentiation from analytical siblings.

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 coverage is 100%, establishing baseline 3. Description mentions 'indexed context' which loosely contextualizes the 'searchScope' parameter, but provides no additional semantics for 'maxSources' or parameter interrelationships beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States specific action (answer questions) about resource (repo-level) and mechanism (indexed context, local LLM). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search' or 'summarize' which may also use indexed context.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search', 'analyze_file', or 'summarize'. Does not mention prerequisites such as whether the codebase needs indexing first.

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