python_dir

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the important 'uv-managed' scope, which is useful context, but it doesn't disclose behavior such as error cases or whether the output is a single path or list. With annotations covering the core behavior, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 of six words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes to the meaning, with no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only tool with one well-documented parameter and an output schema present, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it lacks any guidance on when to use it relative to sibling tools, which is a minor gap given the abundance of similar Python-related tools. Overall, it is complete enough for basic selection and invocation.

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 covers the only parameter 'which' with a description of possible values ('default' or 'bin'). Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add extra detail, but it also does not enrich the meaning beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline of 3.

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 ('Show') and a resource ('uv-managed Python directory'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on installing, listing, or upgrading Python. However, the term 'directory' is somewhat vague without explicitly stating it returns a path, so it is clear but not fully elaborative.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as python_list or python_find. There are no usage scenarios, exclusions, or mention of sibling tools, leaving the agent without clear decision-making information.

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