scaffold_meta_box

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It notes nonce and capability checks, adding behavioral context. However, it fails to mention that the tool generates code files, potential side effects (e.g., file creation), or any required permissions. For a generation tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and key deliverables with no wasted words. It uses a colon to list components efficiently.

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's simplicity (no output schema, flat parameters), the description covers the core purpose and components. It could explicitly state that it generates PHP code for WordPress, but the term 'generate' and meta box context are sufficient. The mention of nonce/capability checks adds completeness.

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 all 7 parameters are already explained in the input schema. The description does not add additional meaning or examples beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states 'Generate a WordPress meta box' and enumerates specific components (registration, render callback, save handler with nonce/capability checks, field definitions). This distinguishes it from sibling scaffolding tools like scaffold_settings_page or scaffold_cpt_module.

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 for creating WordPress meta boxes but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. The distinct purpose is evident from the verb and resource, but no direct when/when-not advice is given.

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