Generate PRD

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention output format, length, quality expectations, or any limitations. The vague term 'enterprise-grade' does not meaningfully convey behavior beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a straightforward tool, though it could benefit from additional detail without becoming verbose.

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 tool has five required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the generated PRD contains, how it is structured, or any contextual dependencies, leaving significant gaps for an agent relying solely on this description.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, meaning parameters lack any textual explanation. The description only mentions 'feature idea' but does not clarify the five required parameters (product_name, feature_name, etc.) or their roles, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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 Product Requirement Document from a feature idea, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like generate_user_stories or generate_roadmap, which could lead to confusion about which tool to use for related tasks.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context that would help an agent decide between generate_prd and sibling tools like competitor_analysis or prioritize_features.

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