show_errors

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states it displays errors/warnings, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., clearing log), whether it's read-only, persistence, or output format. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate behavior.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no redundant information. Every word 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?

For a simple display tool with no parameters or output schema, the description is minimally viable. It explains the primary function but lacks scope (e.g., cumulative or per-session, whether it clears on invocation). Given no output schema, it should hint at return type.

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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% schema coverage. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but none are needed. Baseline score of 4 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?

Description clearly states the tool displays captured console errors and warnings from Strudel, with a specific verb ('Display') and resource ('captured console errors and warnings'), distinguishing it clearly from siblings like 'diagnostics' or 'performance_report'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'diagnostics' or 'status'. The description does not mention context or exclusions.

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