jekyll_build

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return capture (exit code, stdout, stderr, duration, _site path) and the timeout ceiling (default 120s). It does not state permission/prerequisite requirements or what happens on failure beyond captured exit code, preventing a 5.

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?

Five tight sentences, each carrying a distinct fact (command form, outputs captured, exclusions, when to use, timing). Front-loaded with purpose and no filler.

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 build tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, timing, and constraints. Missing only failure-mode detail (e.g., what a non-zero exit implies or partial-build behavior) to be fully complete.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'clean' parameter, so baseline is already 3. The description adds meaningful context about how the build command is formed (Gemfile detection) and does not merely repeat the schema, earning a modest bump.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Run a Jekyll build') and even clarifies the exact command variant (bundle exec when Gemfile present). It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools like jekyll_validate and jekyll_doctor, which serve different verification purposes.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('after creating or modifying components to verify the site builds') and what it is not for ('Does not accept arbitrary shell commands'). This routing guidance is unusually complete.

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