Create app

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It notes dependency and preview behavior for each template (zero deps vs react needing install_dependencies), but it omits side effects like directory creation, potential overwrites, or response format. This is incomplete for a mutation 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?

Compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a structured, semicolon-separated list of templates. Every sentence carries 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?

Covers all five templates with dependencies and preview notes, sufficient for an agent to choose correctly and invoke. Lacking details on return value or filesystem side effects, but given the tool's nature and absence of output schema, it is fairly complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters, yet the description adds substantial value by detailing each template's contents, dependencies, and preview expectations, going far beyond the enum. Name semantics are adequately covered in schema, and template semantics are richly explained.

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?

States a specific verb 'scaffold' and resource 'app from a template', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle file ops, deployment, etc. The description unambiguously identifies the action and object.

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?

Implicitly indicates when to use (when creating a new app) and provides template-selection guidance, including an explicit prerequisite for react (install_dependencies before preview). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives since none exist for creation, leaving a slight gap.

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