save_baseline

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It correctly indicates that this tool scans code and creates a file (side effect). However, it does not specify whether the baseline file is overwritten, what the tool returns, the exact file format (JSON is mentioned but no structure), or any required permissions.

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 sentences totaling ~30 words, with the core action front-loaded: 'Scan code and save the findings as a baseline JSON file.' Every part is necessary and functional with no filler.

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 tool that both scans and persists state, the description explains the baseline workflow but omits the return value (e.g., scan results, confirmation, or baseline path). It also does not clarify default behavior if output_path is omitted, leaving the agent to rely on the schema's default value string. Given the complexity and lack of output schema, these gaps reduce completeness to adequate but not thorough.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds marginal value beyond the schema by implying that output_path is the baseline save location. This meets the baseline of 3 but does not enrich parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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 scans code and saves findings as a baseline JSON file, with a specific purpose: enabling differential reporting via scan_with_baseline. This distinguishes it from siblings like scan_code (which scans without saving) and scan_with_baseline (which consumes the baseline).

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 explicitly links save_baseline to a subsequent use of scan_with_baseline, telling the agent when to use this tool. It provides context about the differential workflow, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative scan-only tools.

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