faf_init

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

Discloses key behaviors: no overwrite, path confinement. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. Lacks details on error handling or permissions, but adequate for a simple creation tool.

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?

Four concise sentences, each adding value: purpose, output, safety (no overwrite + alternative), and constraint. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers purpose, safety, and path constraint, but misses return value (despite output schema existence) and error cases. Moderate completeness for a simple tool with no schema descriptions.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only mentions three of four parameters (name, goal, language) but omits 'path' and doesn't explain defaults or format. Incomplete parameter guidance.

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 starter .faf file with project name, goal, and language, generating a valid FAF YAML. It does not explicitly differentiate from all siblings but provides enough context to understand its role as initial setup.

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?

Explicitly states when not to use (if file exists) and directs to sibling tool faf_discover. Also mentions path constraint to project root, providing clear usage boundaries.

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