xcode_build_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the tool shows settings but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, whether it modifies state, or what happens if the scheme/configuration is invalid. This is adequate but minimal.

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, clear sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently conveys the core function.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description could be more complete by noting typical output (e.g., list of key-value pairs) or clarifying that it does not modify the project. It is adequate for a simple read operation but lacks depth.

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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for scheme, projectPath, configuration, and timeoutSeconds. 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 clearly states it shows 'resolved build settings for a scheme and configuration,' specifying the verb (show) and resources (scheme, configuration). It distinguishes from sibling tools like xcode_build or xcode_test that perform actions rather than display settings.

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?

The description implies usage context (when inspecting build settings) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like xcode_build or xcode_list. No exclusion criteria or sibling references are given.

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