Write agent guide

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it prepends a dynamic header, always returns the guide in the structured result, and optionally writes to disk with output_dir. Annotations already indicate not destructive and open world, and the description does not contradict them.

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, well-structured, and front-loaded. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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 low complexity, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, behavior, parameters, and return value. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 adds meaning: explains what path does (summary with node count and top families), clarifies filename defaults, and describes output_dir as optional. This adds value beyond the schema descriptions.

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 it emits a project-local CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md seeded with tdmcp operator conventions and TouchDesigner render-coordinate rules. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on creating a guide for future agents, which is a unique purpose among the listed sibling tools.

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 provides clear context on when to use: to give a future agent the right mental model. It also mentions optional behavior (output_dir to write to disk). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the purpose is sufficiently unique.

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