write_file

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (mutation). The description adds that the tool is 'path-traversal guarded' (security behavior) and 'Refreshes the editor filesystem' (side effect), providing useful context beyond what annotations convey. No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, and the second adds a critical side effect. Every word contributes, no redundancy.

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 two params and no output schema, the description covers the basics (action, location, security, side effect). However, it misses details like overwrite behavior, encoding, and path resolution rules (e.g., relative vs absolute), which are moderately important for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 0% description coverage for its two required parameters (path, content). The description does not explain parameter meanings, formats, encoding, or constraints beyond stating the tool writes a text file. This is insufficient to clarify parameter semantics.

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 states the verb 'Write', the resource 'text file', and the location constraints 'under res:// (or user://)'. It also mentions path-traversal guarding, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_file (reading) and write_script (writing scripts).

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 implies usage for writing text files to specific paths but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like write_script. No exclusions or when-not-to-use instructions are given.

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