tv_pine_create

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

The description claims to replace contents (a write operation), but annotations set readOnlyHint=true, which contradicts. This is a serious inconsistency. Beyond that, the description does not disclose requirements like the editor being open or overwriting behavior beyond the parameter.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, no wasted words. Every sentence adds essential information.

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 simple replace operation, the description covers core behavior and the need to save. It lacks error handling details or prerequisites, but given no output schema, it is reasonably 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% with descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds value by specifying that the source should include '//@version=6' and clarifies the name field as informational, slightly enhancing the schema.

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 verb 'Replace' and the resource 'Pine editor contents with a new v6 indicator source'. It distinguishes from siblings like tv_pine_save and tv_pine_patch by specifying it replaces rather than patches or saves.

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 explicitly says 'Does NOT save. Call tv_pine_save afterwards', providing clear guidance on when to use this tool and that saving is a separate step. It does not exclude scenarios like patching, but the context is sufficient.

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