codix.api.generate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Generate... plan' but doesn't clarify whether this modifies files, returns a plan object, requires authentication, or has other side effects. This is a significant transparency gap for a tool that might scaffold code.

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 one concise sentence and is front-loaded with the main purpose. It lists multiple output artifacts efficiently. It loses a point because 'from resources' is vague and could be rephrased for clarity without adding length.

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 three parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It omits what 'resources' are, what auth/style choices mean, and what the generated output actually looks like. The sibling context suggests many similar generators, so more differentiation is needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only references 'resources' (via 'from resources') but leaves 'auth' and 'style' completely unexplained. The enums for auth and style provide options but no semantic meaning, so the description adds minimal value 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 names a specific verb ('Generate') and a clear resource ('API route/controller/service/validation/test plan'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like docs.generate or prompt.generate. However, 'from resources' is ambiguous—it doesn't specify whether resources are file paths, resource names, or data models—so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

No usage guidance is provided beyond the implied purpose. The description does not state when to prefer this over alternatives, what inputs are required, or any prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer context.

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