docshelf_init_shelf

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

Annotations already indicate idempotency; the description adds detail about what is created (directory layout, INDEX.md, etc.) and confirms it is safe to call on existing shelves. This enriches behavioral understanding.

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 concise paragraphs with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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's complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the main actions and idempotency. It does not detail return values or prerequisites, but output schema presumably covers returns.

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 provides descriptions for all parameters; the description adds value by explaining how shelf_path, default_categories, and github_remote are used (e.g., pre-creates categories, stores remote for links).

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 initializes a document shelf, listing specific files and directories created. It distinguishes from sibling tools like docshelf_add_document by focusing on setup rather than content management.

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 usage for creating or updating a shelf but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. siblings like docshelf_rebuild_index. No alternative guidance is provided.

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