escribir_sinopsisWrite or update the synopsis document for a Story Architect project. Provide project name and synopsis text to save changes; use preview to check before confirming.
ESCRIBE la sinopsis del proyecto (documento Sinopsis).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| texto | Yes | ||
| preview | No | ||
| proyecto | Yes | ||
| confirmar | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, and the description only says the synopsis is written. It does not explain side effects, whether the document is overwritten, or the role of the preview/confirmar flags.
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 one short declarative sentence with no filler. It is concise, though it accomplishes little beyond restating the tool name.
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?
A complete write tool would explain what writing the synopsis means (create vs overwrite), whether confirmation is required, and how preview behaves. None of this is covered.
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 coverage is 0% and the description barely hints at `proyecto` (the project) and `texto` (the synopsis text). It gives no guidance for `preview` or `confirmar`, which are non-obvious.
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 identifies the action ('ESCRIBE') and the target ('la sinopsis del proyecto / documento Sinopsis'), making the tool's purpose clear and distinguishing it from related actions like escribir_guion or escribir_tratamiento, though not explicitly.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus siblings such as escribir_guion, editar_escena, or how the write/preview/confirmation flow works.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.