Tree

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds that the tree is 'redacted' with 'opaque @p_<id> path references', which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 that is front-loaded with the core action. It is concise but could benefit from slight expansion on the tree depth or reference format.

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?

An output schema is present, so return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose and key behavioral aspects, but missing usage guidelines and parameter details reduce completeness for decision-making.

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 description coverage is 50% (path has description, max_depth does not). The tool description does not explain parameter usage or add meaning beyond the schema, leaving max_depth ambiguous in its effect.

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 the tool shows a redacted file tree with opaque @p_<id> references, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like redctx_list and redctx_read that list files or read contents. The verb 'Show' and resource 'redacted file tree' are specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as redctx_list or redctx_stat. It lacks context about when not to use it or what distinguishes it further.

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