arvan_iac_terraform_fmt

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

Annotations provide no behavioral hints. The description discloses that write=True applies formatting changes, implying a mutation, but lacks details on side effects, safety, 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 a single concise sentence that gets the point across efficiently. It could add more context without being verbose, but it is front-loaded and not wasteful.

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 no output schema and minimal description, the tool is somewhat complete for a simple formatting check, but lacks details on return values, error handling, and how it integrates with other Terraform tools. It is minimally viable.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters. While 'files' and 'directory' are somewhat inferable, the mapping object for 'files' is unclear, and no guidance is given on how they affect behavior.

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 it checks Terraform formatting, with the option to apply changes via write=True. It distinguishes from sibling Terraform tools like plan, apply, validate, tflint, etc., which have different 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?

The description implies using it for formatting but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives or when not to use it. No context on prerequisites or relationships to other tools.

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