ecosystem_init

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose side effects and behavior. It states that agentic.toml is created, but does not mention overwrite behavior, required permissions, or the effect of the 'scan' parameter (e.g., auto-detecting existing projects). This is a significant gap for a tool that writes configuration files.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the core function. It is concise with no superfluous words, and every part earns its place.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, low schema coverage, and absence of an output schema, the description is too sparse to be complete. It leaves unclear what happens if agentic.toml already exists, what the created config contains, and how parameters map to behavior. This is inadequate for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 description coverage is only 22% (only workspace_root and scan have descriptions). The description does not compensate by explaining any of the 9 parameters or their defaults. For example, it does not clarify what 'defaults' are stored or how 'scan' influences behavior, leaving the agent to rely on parameter names alone.

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 function: 'Inicializa el plano de control: crea agentic.toml en el workspace con registro canónico de proyectos y sus defaults.' It uses specific verbs (inicializa/crea) and a specific resource (agentic.toml), which distinguishes it from sibling init_project by focusing on the control plane level.

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 like init_project or ecosystem_config. It only states what it does, without mentioning prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios. The user must infer usage context solely from the name and description.

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