generate_model_with_relationships

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It only states the tool generates models with relationships, but does not mention whether files are overwritten, whether existing code is modified, or any potential unintended consequences. The phrase 'properly configured' lacks detail about validation or error behavior.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose and usage, followed by a structured Args block. It is reasonably concise and avoids fluff, though the Args section could be tightened.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks essential detail on how relationships are declared in the model definitions. It mentions relation types but does not explain how BelongsTo/HasMany/ManyToMany are represented in the dicts, which is critical for correctly using this tool. The completeness for a complex generation task is insufficient.

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 the 'models' parameter, so the description compensates by listing expected keys (name, columns, backend_type, id_column_name). This provides meaningful structure beyond the schema, but the 'columns' sub-structure is not detailed, leaving ambiguity about column schemas.

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 'Generate multiple related clearskies Model classes with their relationships properly configured.' This specifies a concrete verb (generate) and resource (Model classes), and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'generate_model' by emphasizing multiple models and relationships.

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?

Provides a clear usage context: 'Use this when you need to create models with BelongsTo, HasMany, or ManyToMany relationships.' This tells the agent when to pick this tool over alternatives like 'generate_model', though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it.

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