generate_node_output

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds context about using generative AI and output format, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or failure modes. With annotations covering safety, the description adds moderate value.

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 three sentences, front-loading purpose and then specifics. Every sentence adds value with no fluff. Highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain the return format more. It only says 'Returns content you can use with create_node or update_node', which is vague. For a generative tool, the agent might need to know the structure to reuse it. However, the tool's intended integration with other tools makes it adequate but not fully 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description mentions 'natural language prompt' and 'plain text or rich Adaptive Cards', which align with prompt and outputType but do not add new information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses generative AI to create content for Say nodes, specifying two output types (plain text or Adaptive Cards) and linking the output to use with create_node or update_node. This is a specific verb-resource pairing that distinguishes it from siblings like generate_sentences.

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: it's for generating Say node content. It implies the output is meant for use with create_node/update_node, but does not explicitly exclude alternative uses or mention when not to use it. No comparisons to other generation tools are given.

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