Write file

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It does state the destructive overwrite behavior and automatic directory creation, which is helpful. However, it omits potential errors (e.g., app not existing), return values, and any prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent to discover.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action (create or overwrite) and then a key behavioral detail. There is no redundancy or unnecessary text, making it as concise as possible while still informative.

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?

For a simple file-write tool, the description covers the basic function and directory auto-creation. However, given no annotations or output schema, it lacks details on return behavior, error handling, and whether the app must already exist. These would be expected for a complete definition.

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 only 33% (only path is described). The tool description adds no details about the app or content parameters, relying on inference from the tool name. Since the schema is sparse, the description should compensate but does not, leaving ambiguity for two of three parameters.

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 or overwrites a file in an app, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_file and read_file by focusing on the write operation, so an agent can easily tell what it does.

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 (when you need to create or overwrite a file) and provides a useful hint that parent directories are auto-created, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like read_file or delete_file. The when-not-to-use guidance is left to inference, making it adequate but not explicit.

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