code_complexity

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

The description only says 'calculate' without disclosing safety (e.g., read-only, no side effects). No annotations exist to compensate, leaving behavioral traits unclear.

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?

Very concise, front-loaded with the main purpose. Could omit the parameter list if schema is sufficient, but it's not redundant given coverage is 0%.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, missing constraints (e.g., supported languages list) and no example usage, leaving some 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must add meaning. It only lists parameter names and a default, missing details like code length limits, language format, or examples.

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 tool calculates cyclomatic complexity and other code metrics, with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like code_beautify or code_stats.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as code_stats or text_complexity. No when-not-to-use or context provided.

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