generate_nestjs_controller

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 only states that it generates a controller, but does not mention whether it writes files, overwrites existing code, requires an api_key, or how the generated route handlers behave.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It is concise and easy to parse, though it could have included more behavioral context without becoming bloated.

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 code-generation tool with four parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what controller_name produces, how api_key is used, how routes shape the output, or whether existing files will be modified.

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 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, though the mention of 'decorators and route handlers' loosely connects to routes and use_guards.

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 identifies the action ('Generate') and the resource ('a NestJS controller'), and adds 'with decorators and route handlers' to convey the core output. This is enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like generate_nestjs_module and generate_nestjs_service, though it does not explicitly describe the resulting artifacts.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus generate_nestjs_module, generate_nestjs_service, or other scaffold/generate tools. No prerequisites, workflow context, or conditions for choosing this tool are provided.

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