update_form_request_messages

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

The description discloses that the tool edits the file on disk and returns planned or applied changes. It explains the dry_run option to avoid modifications. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it adequately covers the main behaviors but could mention potential side effects like overwriting existing messages.

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 two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: explaining the core function and providing usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the main action and is appropriately concise with no unnecessary words.

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 tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage context, parameter behavior, and expected outcome. An AI agent can correctly select and invoke the tool based on this description alone.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the `dry_run` parameter's effect ('preview the diff without writing'), which goes beyond the schema's boolean description. For a simple tool with 100% schema coverage, this is above baseline.

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 purpose: synchronise the `messages()` method of a Laravel FormRequest class by adding, linking, and dropping entries. It specifies the verb (synchronise) and resource (messages() of FormRequest), and distinguishes it from sibling tools which perform different tasks.

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 explicit guidance: 'Use after changing a FormRequest's `rules()`.' It also explains the `dry_run` parameter to preview changes. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, which would improve clarity.

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