backend

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions actions and port freeing, but does not disclose side effects such as making served apps unavailable when stopping or restarting. This is a significant gap for a management 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?

The description is a single sentence that immediately states the resource and actions, with no filler or redundant content. It is optimally concise and front-loaded.

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 tool is simple (one param, no output schema), but the description lacks details about the status command's output and the impact of stop/restart on running apps. It is adequate for basic understanding but not fully complete given the absence of annotations.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with an enum describing the action parameter. The description merely lists the same enum values without adding extra meaning or details about each action's behavior, so it meets the baseline but adds no new value.

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: 'Manage the local express backend serving the transpiled apps' and enumerates specific actions (status | start | stop | restart). This distinguishes it from siblings like run_app, which is mentioned as a separate tool.

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?

It provides explicit guidance: 'run_app starts it automatically; use this for diagnostics or to free the port.' This tells when to use this tool and names the alternative (run_app) for normal start.

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