get_commit_diff

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what format the diff is returned in, or any side effects. The single line provides minimal behavioral insight.

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 very short, which is concise, but it lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded as a single sentence, but earns its place only partially due to missing critical information.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., diff content, stats). It only mentions 'parent 기준' without elaboration. The tool's purpose is partially clear but incomplete for effective use.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for full coverage.

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 mentions viewing single commit changes based on parent, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools like get_commit or compare_refs, and the meaning of 'parent 기준' is ambiguous.

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 such as get_commit, get_mr_diff, or compare_refs. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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