caddy_adapt

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context: conversion is done locally ('without loading it'), returns 'adapted JSON and any warnings separately', and requires adapter modules to be compiled in. This exceeds annotation coverage.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main verb 'Convert', with each sentence providing necessary detail (purpose, usage, output). No redundancy.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, prerequisites, and return format. It is self-contained for an agent to decide when to invoke and interpret results.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions. The description enriches by listing built-in ('caddyfile') and external adapters ('nginx', 'yaml') and noting adapter module requirements, which adds meaning beyond schema.

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 states 'Convert a config in any registered adapter format to Caddy JSON without loading it.' This clearly identifies the action (convert), the resource (config), and the output (Caddy JSON). The 'without loading it' distinguishes it from loading-related siblings like caddy_load.

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 says 'Useful for previewing what a Caddyfile produces, or for porting from nginx/yaml configs.' This gives explicit use cases. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use, so it provides clear context but no exclusions.

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