get_commit_diff

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description only states the core function without elaborating on behavioral traits like pagination, diff format, or limits on diff size. The full_diff parameter is documented in the schema but not mentioned in the description.

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, front-loaded sentence that is concise and free of unnecessary words. It could be slightly more informative but remains efficient.

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?

The description is minimal and does not cover what the agent can expect in the output, such as file names, diff hunks, or whether it's a unified diff. Since there is no output schema, the description should compensate, but it fails to do so.

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 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'changes/diffs of a specific commit', clearly indicating it retrieves the diff for a single commit. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_commit (metadata) and get_branch_diffs (branch-level diffs).

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 get_merge_request_diffs or get_branch_diffs. An agent would not know the appropriate context for selection.

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