ai_recommend_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions detection of business patterns and forced template selection with hint_modern_stack, but does not disclose whether the tool has side effects, mutates state, or returns data. As a recommendation tool, it is likely read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 two sentences and covers the main purpose and a key parameter hint. It is concise but somewhat dense; the first sentence could be split for better readability. Nevertheless, every sentence contributes value.

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 description explains what the tool recommends (template_category and generate options) but does not describe the output format or structure. Since no output schema exists, the agent would benefit from knowing what fields the recommendation contains. This gap limits 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 coverage is 100% and the description adds meaningful context for each parameter: table_names is a list of full table names, foreign_keys is optional with objects, and hint_modern_stack forces a modern stack template. It explains the effect of hint_modern_stack beyond the schema's default description.

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's purpose: to recommend a template_category and generate options based on table names and foreign keys, and also detect business patterns. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like codegen_render_* or db_query_*, which have different functions.

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 when needing template recommendations for databases with FK relationships, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The hint_modern_stack parameter provides a conditional use case, but no when-not or alternative tools are mentioned.

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