plc_download

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the guard, method behaviors, autoLogout effects, and states 'never logs back in,' providing good insight into side effects.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, guard, method details, autoLogout behavior—concise and well-structured with no fluff.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core behavior and key parameters, though it could elaborate on autostart and treePath.

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 only 17%—the description adds value by explaining confirm, method enum, and autoLogout, but leaves treePath, autostart, and commandName undocumented.

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 'Deploy the active PLC project' with specific details about methods and guard, distinguishing it from sibling tools like plc_library or plc_project.

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 explains the guard requirement and the two methods (bootproject vs command) with context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose one method over the other or alternatives among siblings.

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