scaffold_fastapi_project

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 says 'generate' and 'best-practice structure' without stating whether this writes files to disk, requires a specific working directory, overwrites existing files, or what the resulting artifact looks like.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, though the phrase 'best-practice structure' is somewhat generic.

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 four-parameter scaffolding tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It doesn't explain how the database, async_db, or api_key parameters shape the generated project, nor does it mention the expected output or side effects of scaffolding.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for all four parameters, so the schema already documents each parameter sufficiently. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'generate' and the resource 'FastAPI project,' which clearly distinguishes it from other scaffold_* siblings targeting different frameworks. However, it doesn't explicitly state how this differs from related FastAPI component tools like generate_fastapi_router or generate_fastapi_models.

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 phrase 'Generate a FastAPI project' implies this is for initial project creation rather than adding individual components, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided.

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