tidy_drift

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

The description offers no insight into side effects, permissions, rate limits, or any behavioral traits. The '[NOT IMPLEMENTED YET]' label suggests it currently does nothing, but this is not explained, and no annotations exist to fill the gap.

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 brief, but it is unstructured and ambiguous. It mixes a status note with an incomplete product description, and the sentence is not sufficiently informative to be considered well-crafted.

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 fundamentally incomplete—it announces an unimplemented feature but does not explain what the report would contain, how to interpret it, or how to invoke the tool. Without any output schema or additional context, an agent cannot determine what this tool does or if it is usable.

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 schema has zero parameters, so there is no additional information to add. The description does not clarify any implicit arguments (e.g., which surfaces to target), but with no parameters defined, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool produces a 'drift report' across four surfaces, but it does not clearly define the action (e.g., generate, compare, analyze). The phrase '[NOT IMPLEMENTED YET]' further obscures any intended functionality, leaving the tool's purpose vague.

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 or how it relates to sibling tools like tidy_status or tidy_plan. There is no mention of conditions, alternatives, or prerequisites, making it impossible to determine appropriate usage.

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