Generate project README

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds useful context: returns Markdown on structured channel, optional preview thumbnail, and use of parameters. No contradictions, but could mention 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?

Two concise sentences front-load purpose and list contents, then provide parameter tips. No wasted words; efficient and scannable.

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 5 parameters and output schema exists, the description covers tool purpose, output format, and key options. Lacks details on error handling or performance, but sufficient for typical use.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description reinforces parameter usage, e.g., 'Use include_mermaid to add a Mermaid flowchart' and 'max_nodes to cap large inventories,' adding value beyond schema.

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 produces a Markdown project document for COMP or project, listing specific content (counts, parameter table, inputs/outputs, inventory, dependencies, preview). It distinguishes from siblings like document_network by specifying scope and components.

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 implies usage for generating documentation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like document_network. It provides guidance on parameters (include_mermaid, max_nodes) but lacks exclusions or when-not-to-use context.

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