vibemap_create_user_story

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but not destructive. The description adds that it creates a story 'inside a VibeMap feature,' providing some context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, error conditions, or rate limits. With annotations only providing basic info, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences long, direct, and somewhat front-loaded. Every word adds value. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing required inputs), but it avoids fluff and is 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?

Given 8 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is too brief. It does not explain the purpose of user stories in VibeMap, how they relate to features, what the tool returns (likely an ID), or any constraints. More completeness is needed for an agent to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is low (38%). The description adds meaning for userRole, iWantTo, and soThat by naming them as 'role, action, and expected outcome.' But it omits explanation of required parameters like featureId, title, description, and optional ones like priority and estimatedEffort. The description does not compensate sufficiently for the low schema coverage.

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 'Create a new user story' which is a specific verb and resource. It mentions 'user role, action, and expected outcome' which map to userRole, iWantTo, and soThat parameters. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like vibemap_update_user_story, but the verb 'create' is unambiguous.

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 basic instructions ('Provide the user role, action, and expected outcome') but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vibemap_update_user_story or vibemap_list_user_stories. No 'when not to use' or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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