adg_edition

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

Description details the offline classification logic and return of verdict plus driving devices, adding value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It explains the tool is a read-only analysis without mutation.

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?

Concise and well-structured: starts with the primary purpose, provides details on the classification criteria, and ends with the returned information. No wasted words.

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 classification tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the classification logic, criteria, and output content, enabling the agent to use it correctly.

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?

Only one parameter (path) with schema description coverage at 0%. The description does not clarify that path should be a file path to a .adg/.adv file, leaving ambiguity. The tool expects the agent to infer the parameter's purpose from context.

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?

Clearly states the tool classifies the Live edition needed for a .adg/.adv file based on devices present. Lists specific device examples for suite, standard, and intro, and mentions returning verdict and driving devices. Distinguishes from siblings like adg_analyze or adg_summary by focusing on edition classification.

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?

Implicitly guides when to use: to check if a preset will load on the user's edition before loading it. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives mentioned, but the context of compatibility checking is clear.

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