generate_prototype

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states output is a standalone HTML file but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or what happens to existing data. Lacks transparency typical for a generation tool.

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 with no filler. First sentence states core action and scope, second sentence specifies output format. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (nested objects, recursive schema, 5 parameters) and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits how return values are structured, error handling, or usage patterns beyond the basic output format.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter meanings beyond the schema, but the schema already provides sufficient detail for parameters like screens, navigation_flow, etc.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('interactive HTML prototypes') with clear context ('screen flows, navigation, and transitions'). It differentiates from siblings like generate_ui_component or generate_page_template by focusing on full prototypes with navigation.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like generate_component_library or generate_form. The description does not state prerequisites, when not to use, or recommend alternatives.

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