metro

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic actions. It doesn't indicate whether operations are destructive, require authentication, or have side effects. With 38 parameters, agents are left blind to important behavioral context.

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 sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is too brief to be informative. While it avoids verbosity, the lack of structure (e.g., not dividing into prepare vs reload) limits its usability for agents.

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?

With 38 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what 'prepare' entails, what 'reload' does, or how to choose between them. The complexity of the tool demands far more context than provided.

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 meaning to the 38 parameters. Schema coverage is only 45%, and many parameters have empty descriptions. The description doesn't explain how parameters relate to the actions or provide context for correct usage. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose: preparing the Metro runtime or reloading React Native apps. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from generic tools. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling 'react-native' tool, which may overlap in functionality.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'react-native' and many UI interaction tools, agents would lack criteria for selection. No mention of prerequisites or conditions for using 'prepare' vs 'reload'.

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