rvtdocs_debug

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It mentions diagnostic fetch with metadata but does not disclose side effects, destruction risk, permissions, or rate limits. Minimal disclosure beyond purpose.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with action. No redundant information, earns its place.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and 0% param descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'snippet and resolver/semantic trace metadata' entails, leaving agent unsure of tool's full capabilities.

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% (only titles). Description adds no meaning to parameters (query, year, max_chars), leaving agent uninformed about their roles. Does not compensate for bare schema.

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 uses specific verb 'run' and resource 'diagnostic fetch', and explicitly states what it produces ('snippet and resolver/semantic trace metadata'), distinguishing it from the likely normal fetch of sibling rvtdocs_fetch.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., rvtdocs_fetch). 'Diagnostic' implies debugging context but lacks clear exclusions or when-not advice.

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