brand_build_personas

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses writing to .brand/strategy.yaml, auto-generating IDs (PER-001), bumping session counter to 4 on first write, and being part of Session 4. Could mention whether records replace or append, but overall quite transparent.

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 long but well-structured: first sentence summarizes, then details each mode, side effects, and usage cues. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Could be slightly tighter, but 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?

No output schema, so description should describe return format. It states 'Returns persona data and total count' but lacks specifics on structure or data fields. For a tool with three modes and significant side effects, a more detailed output explanation would improve completeness.

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 all 3 parameters with 100% description coverage. Description adds value by explaining that 'record' mode accepts JSON or freeform text via parseAnswers, lists interview question topics (role, tension, etc.), and clarifies persona_id usage for updates. This extra context goes beyond 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 the tool builds buyer personas via a guided 7-question interview. It specifies each mode (interview, record, list) and what it returns, and distinguishes from sibling brand_compile_messaging by noting it is not for voice definition.

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?

Provides explicit triggers ('define personas', 'who is our audience', 'start Session 4'), notes when NOT to use it (voice definition → brand_compile_messaging), and gives guidance on persona count ('Most brands need 3-5 personas').

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