aeo_generate_prompts

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context by promising 'intent-balanced' and 'deduped' outputs. It does not disclose return format or limits, but the added qualifiers go beyond the basic read-only annotation.

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 front-loaded sentence: it leads with the core action and resource, then adds two compact behavioral qualifiers. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns, but it does not. It also omits parameter behavior and usage context for a tool with six parameters, leaving it meaningfully underspecified despite the read-only annotation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it barely does. It only implies 'topic' and hints at existing_prompts via 'additional' and 'deduped'; brand, config, target_count, and primary_intent are left unexplained for a six-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb ('Propose') and resource ('additional natural-language AEO prompts') with a clear scope ('for a topic'). The qualifiers 'intent-balanced + deduped' distinguish it from sibling tools like aeo_filter_prompts or aeo_cluster_prompts.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as aeo_cluster_prompts or aeo_filter_prompts. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or use-case statements; the only implied use is 'generate prompts,' which is insufficient for tool selection.

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