explore_repo

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Explore one configured repository with codegraph explore', giving no information about side effects, safety, permissions, rate limits, or what happens during exploration. For a tool that likely performs actions (running a command), this is critically insufficient.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is under-specified, missing essential details. It earns a 4 for efficiency but could improve by adding more context without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, an output schema, and 4 sibling tools, the description is far too brief. It does not explain what the tool returns, how parameters affect behavior, or how it relates to siblings. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of description about the overall operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning to parameters. It does not. Parameters like repo, query, max_files, timeout_seconds are only listed by name and title, with no explanation of their purpose, format, or behavior. The description does not reference any parameters.

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?

Description states the tool explores one configured repository, but 'explore' is vague and doesn't specify if it's searching, browsing, or analyzing. The reference to 'codegraph explore' adds some context but doesn't clarify the exact function. Compared to sibling tools like ask_multi_repo, the distinction is implied but not explicit.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description implies it's for a single repository (contrast with ask_multi_repo), but does not state when to use or not use it. No prerequisites or alternatives mentioned.

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