project-playbooks

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the tool discovers playbooks, implying a read-only operation, but fails to detail whether it scans recursively, returns absolute paths, or has any side effects. The agent is left guessing about important behaviors.

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, well-structured sentence that wastes no words. It conveys the core purpose and scope efficiently.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It does not describe the output format (though an output schema exists), nor does it clarify what 'playbooks (YAML lists)' means or if there are any constraints. Given the many siblings, more context would help.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the 'project' parameter is not explained in the description. While the description mentions searching under project root or configured path, it does not explicitly clarify that 'project' selects which root to search. The parameter's role remains ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb 'Discover' and clearly identifies the resource as 'playbooks (YAML lists)'. It states the scope 'under the project root or configured playbooks_path', which distinctly differentiates it from sibling tools like 'ansible-playbook' (run) or 'create-playbook' (create).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context that would help an agent decide between this and similar discovery or playbook-related tools.

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