webdev_border_radius_generator

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'visual preview' but lacks details on behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, destructive, or any side effects. It does not disclose response format or limitations.

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?

Three sentences; first two are concise but the 'Menu ID: border_radius' line is irrelevant for an agent. Not verbose, but could be more streamlined.

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?

The description lacks details about the tool's output (e.g., CSS code snippet), how the preview works, or any constraints. Given the simple nature, it should explain what the user gets back.

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?

The schema accepts any additional properties with no defined parameters. The description mentions 'individual corner control' implying parameters exist but does not specify them. It adds some semantic meaning beyond the empty schema but incomplete.

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's purpose: 'Generate CSS border radius online' and 'Create rounded corners for any element with individual corner control and visual preview.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like box shadow or gradient generators.

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 alternatives. The only advice is to use describe_tool for more information, but no explicit when/when-not or comparison with sibling tools.

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