cookie_generate_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals only that this is a Pro feature; it does not say whether the tool writes files, overwrites existing content, requires authentication, or returns any output. This is a significant transparency gap for a generation 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 one compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then appends the Pro feature constraint, making it easy to scan quickly.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and one undocumented parameter, the description is too thin. An agent still lacks information about what the generated documentation contains, where output is written, whether files are overwritten, and how 'api_key' factors into execution.

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 description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The schema documents 'directory' as 'Project directory', but 'api_key' is only typed as a string and the description never explains how it is used or whether it is required for the Pro feature.

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 states a specific verb ('Generate') and a clear resource ('cookie policy documentation'), so an agent can tell what the tool does. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling cookie tools like cookie_generate_banner or cookie_add_preferences, but the resource phrase is reasonably distinctive.

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 intended use is implied: use this when cookie policy documentation needs to be generated. The '(Pro feature)' note adds a prerequisite/constraint, but the description does not mention when to prefer this tool over related siblings or exclude any cases.

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