get_build_diagnostics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: that warnings are hidden by default and this tool retrieves them. No contradiction.

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?

Efficiently structured: short intro, bulleted usage list, and argument explanation. No filler, front-loaded with purpose.

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 low complexity (1 optional param, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, why this tool exists, when to use, and parameter meaning.

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?

The single parameter 'include_warnings' has default true and is described as 'the point of this tool', adding meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well, though it could clarify the default behavior more explicitly.

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 'Get full build diagnostics including all warnings' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling debug tools by focusing on build diagnostics that are hidden elsewhere.

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 lists four scenarios for use (e.g., 'Build succeeds but the app crashes', 'Investigating assembly loading issues') and explains why warnings are hidden by default in other tools, providing clear when-to-use context.

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