diff_against_disk

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only; no side effects, auth, or rate limits.' It also lists the statuses and what data is returned, providing full behavioral transparency.

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?

Four sentences front-loaded with action, then status types, return data, what it doesn't do, read-only claim, and usage guidance. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, return values, usage conditions, and alternatives. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

Only one parameter (file_id) with schema description 'File ID', which is minimal. The description adds context by stating the tool's purpose, but does not elaborate on file_id format or constraints. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3.

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 purpose: 'Diagnose drift between one file's disk content and its FTS index.' It uses a specific verb ('diagnose drift') and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_diff' and 'refresh_index'.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when search results look stale') and what to do after (run refresh_index if diverged or no_index_row). Also clarifies what it does NOT do (full diff, which is covered by get_diff).

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