generate_system_diagram

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects, inputs, and output. It mentions the diagram is in Mermaid format and can be rendered in markdown viewers, but does not state that it reads C++ header files, whether it is read-only, or how invalid paths are handled.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence adds a useful detail about markdown rendering. No wasted words.

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 tool has no output schema, but the description implicitly indicates the output is Mermaid code. It does not mention the required file_paths parameter or that it focuses on C++ headers, though these are covered by the schema. Overall, it provides enough context to understand the tool's function, but lacks explicit mention of return value and prerequisites.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 creates a system architecture diagram in Mermaid format, showing class relationships, inheritance, and dependencies. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_class_hierarchy (raw hierarchy data) or generate_documentation (documentation).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools. It only gives a high-level purpose without situational context.

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