get_merge_request_file_diff

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

Annotations already indicate read-only. The description adds that it fetches diffs for specific files and requires either an IID or branch, but the parameter requirement ambiguity reduces transparency. No mention of behavior when multiple identifiers are provided or error cases.

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?

Description is a single sentence, but it includes an inaccurate statement about required parameters. While concise, the inaccuracy harms effectiveness.

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?

Given 5 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description should explain the relationship between merge_request_iid and source_branch, and what the output format looks like. It fails to do so, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, and the file_paths hint about calling 'list_merge_request_changed_files' first is redundantly present in the schema.

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 clearly states it gets diffs for specific files from a merge request, which is specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_merge_request_diffs' or 'get_branch_diffs', which may also retrieve diffs but with different scopes.

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 claims 'mergeRequestIid or branchName required', but the schema marks both as optional and only requires project_id and file_paths. This is misleading. No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_merge_request_diffs' or 'get_branch_diffs'.

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