plan_ea_creation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the tool does a registry lookup and records a decision. It does not clarify side effects, idempotency, failure behavior, or what the decision record contains. The write implication of 'record' is present but too vague to understand consequences.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of content needed in other dimensions.

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?

For a tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far too thin. It omits return values, error conditions, and how the mandatory registry lookup and decision record connect to the rest of the EA workflow.

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 0%, and the description mentions none of the 11 parameters. Parameters like setup, filters, exit_rule, and signal_bar have no semantic guidance beyond their names and types. This is a severe gap for an agent trying to construct a valid call.

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 gives the tool a role: a mandatory pre-step that performs a registry lookup and records a decision before EA creation or modification. It names verbs and a resource, so it is not a tautology. However, what the tool actually does is ambiguous—'decision record' is undefined, and the operation could easily be confused with ea_registry.

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 explicitly states the tool is mandatory before generating or modifying an EA, which tells an agent when to call it. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the 'before generating/modifying' condition provides clear contextual guidance.

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