diff_against_disk

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: it declares read-only, no side effects, auth, or rate limits, and details the limited scope of returned data (not a full diff).

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 efficient sentences that front-load the purpose, then provide usage guidance, behavioral notes, and return summary with no wasted words.

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?

For a simple diagnostic tool with one parameter, the description fully explains inputs, outputs (including return values), when to use, and what to do next. No gaps remain.

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% (sole parameter 'file_id' described). The description adds no additional insight beyond the schema's 'File ID', so baseline 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 specifies a concrete action ('Diagnose drift between one file's disk content and its FTS index') and enumerates possible statuses. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_diff' which provides full diffs.

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?

It states when to use ('when search results look stale') and provides a clear follow-up action ('if status is diverged or no_index_row, run refresh_index to fix'), plus contrast with 'get_diff'.

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