script_write

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

The description discloses the destructive behavior ('überschreibt den Inhalt'), but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or error handling. With no annotations, the burden is on the description, and it only adds minimal behavioral context.

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, front-loads the core action, and provides relevant usage advice without any extraneous content.

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 simple write tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and usage, but does not mention return values, error conditions, or follow-up actions like verifying with script_read.

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?

Both parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), and the tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('schreibt') and resource ('PHP-Code in ein bestehendes IP-Symcon Skript'), and explicitly states it overwrites content, distinguishing it from siblings like script_create or script_read.

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 provides a clear usage context ('nach einer Analyse um optimierten oder reparierten Code zu speichern'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.

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