llm_fs_analyze_context

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

No annotations given, but description discloses read-only scanning of specific files, output location and downstream usage. Implies non-destructive behavior, but not explicitly stated.

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, front-loaded with purpose, then details, usage, and args. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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?

Complete description: covers what it does, files scanned, output, when to call, and automatic integration. Output schema exists, so return format detail not required.

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 coverage is 0%, but description includes an Args section explaining both parameters (path and max_files) with defaults and meaning, fully compensating.

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 it analyzes workspace files to build a routing context summary, specifying scanned files and purpose. Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on routing context.

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?

Provides explicit when to call ('once at start of project session or after major refactors') and notes automatic reuse by llm_route and llm_auto. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives.

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