stack_init

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that development happens on a local Anvil fork (chainId 31337) and never deploys directly to mainnet, lists supported chains, and notes prerequisites (Foundry CLI). Covers side effects and constraints well.

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 well-structured with important notes and numbered workflow steps. It front-loads the purpose and each section earns its place, though could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given no output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers purpose, workflow, constraints, prerequisites, and supported chains. It is complete enough for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has 100% coverage on parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that 'chain' means a mainnet to fork and that template is only scaffold-eth, but does not add significant new information beyond the 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?

The description explicitly states 'Initialize a new Scaffold-ETH 2 project with Foundry' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like stack_install and stack_start by focusing on project initialization.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use (starting a new project), what not to do ('NO TESTNETS'), and a full workflow after init. Does not explicitly compare to alternatives, but the workflow steps and warnings are sufficient.

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