cubemx_environment

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Discover...' which implies a non-destructive read operation. It does not specify what exact runtime state is checked, whether it validates versions/paths, or what the output contains. The phrase 'related runtime state' is vague and doesn't clarify side effects or assumptions.

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, concise sentence with no redundant or vague filler. Every word contributes to the meaning, and it is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool.

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 discovery tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient but leaves 'related runtime state' ambiguous. It could be clearer about whether it checks versions, installation paths, environment variables, or toolchain dependencies. The output schema may compensate, but it's not visible here.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is empty and the baseline is 4. The description adds useful tool-level context by naming the discovery targets (STM32CubeMX, STM32CubeIDE, CMake), which helps the agent understand the tool's scope even though no parameters exist.

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 uses the specific verb 'Discover' with a clear resource (local STM32CubeMX, STM32CubeIDE, CMake, and related runtime state). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools that create, inspect, plan, or apply changes to .ioc files and generated projects.

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 versus alternatives, nor any context about prerequisites or whether to run it before other actions. There is no mention of when-not-to-use or recommended workflow placement.

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