IlluGen status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds value beyond them: it explicitly states it does not start IlluGen and changes nothing, and it enumerates the returned diagnostics including running_instances (GUI processes included) and the exe path sourced from ILLUGEN_EXE.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage conditions, then a compact labelled return list. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return contract and does so thoroughly: exe, installed, running_instances, catalog_illugen_version, node_types and presets_dir. It also supplies the diagnostic entry-point rationale, making it fully self-sufficient for a no-arg status tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document; the baseline for a no-arg tool is 4. The description correctly reinforces this with 'Takes no arguments.'

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 and resource: 'Reports whether IlluGen is installed and which node catalog this server uses.' This clearly separates it from sibling tools like list_node_types or list_presets, which enumerate catalog contents rather than reporting installation/server state.

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 call it: first, when an engine tool (project_render, project_validate with engine=true, project_screenshot, project_normalize) fails, or to locate the presets folder. It names the exact alternative conditions and the triggering siblings, leaving nothing to inference.

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