The paste-able 'Growth (AfterLaunch)' section for this repository's CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md: how a coding agent should use AfterLaunch for growth, marketing, SEO, AI visibility (GEO), competitor and distribution work, and which tools cost money. Free, read-only. Show it to the founder and add it with their say-so.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by noting it's 'Free' (no cost) and 'paste-able', and by stipulating the need for founder approval. These details go beyond the annotations and provide useful behavioral context.
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 well-structured: the first sentence delivers the core purpose, followed by two short clarifying sentences on cost/read-only and the approval workflow. Every sentence earns its place; no wasted words.
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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully conveys what the tool returns, its intended use, the workflow, and cost implications. It is complete and self-contained for an agent to select and invoke correctly.
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?
With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; it focuses on the output and purpose, which is appropriate. No parameter information is missing.
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 returns a paste-able section for CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md, specifying its content (how to use AfterLaunch for growth, marketing, SEO, etc.) and distinguishing it from sibling tools by focusing on setup documentation. The verb 'get' is implied through 'paste-able section'.
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?
It gives clear context: use this to obtain a snippet for repository documentation. It also provides an explicit workflow step ('Show it to the founder and add it with their say-so'), indicating when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it's not a full 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and descriptions are thorough. A few pairs (e.g., ship_move vs set_output_status, dismiss_gap vs skip_move) overlap on the dismissal concept but operate on different surfaces, so an agent can usually tell them apart with careful reading.
All tool names follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_move, create_checkout, untrack_prompt). Retrieval tools consistently use get_ for single items and list_ for collections, and action verbs are precise, so the naming is fully predictable.
42 tools is heavy by any standard, exceeding the 25+ threshold in the calibration. While each tool may earn its place given the breadth of the domain, the sheer number will overwhelm an agent and complicate tool selection.
The tool set covers the main lifecycles well: moves (list/get/ship/skip/archive/undo/update), outputs (list/get/ship/redraft), connections (list/start/poll/disconnect), prompts (track/untrack/list), and scans (refresh/get/set intensity). Minor gaps exist, such as no direct edit for KB pages, but record_insight partially fills that.