flutter_analyze

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly describes the behavior: static analysis is run and all errors, warnings, and info-level issues are returned with file locations and rule names. It does not mention side effects or prerequisites, but for a static analysis tool non-mutation is reasonably inferable.

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?

Two sentences deliver the core purpose and output details with no filler. The main action is front-loaded and every word contributes value.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, and the description adequately covers both what the tool does and what it returns. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to decide whether to invoke it.

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 100%: project_dir is already documented as 'Path to the Flutter project directory'. The description does not add additional parameter nuance, so the baseline 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 names a specific verb ('Run static analysis'), a specific resource ('a Flutter project'), and the output it produces. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like flutter_test and flutter_run.

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 purpose implies when to use it: when code quality/static analysis results are needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or mention any exclusions or prerequisites, so the guidance is only implied rather than direct.

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