create_from_template

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

Discloses key behaviors: returns complete .pd content, handles everything internally, and warns against extra commands. With no annotations, description carries full burden; it effectively communicates the tool's safety and output expectations, though could be more explicit about default file creation.

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?

Well-structured with purpose first, then templates, then behavioral instructions. Every sentence contributes, but length could be reduced slightly without losing clarity. Still, it's efficient for the complexity.

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?

Covers template options, parameter details, output behavior (content always returned), and optional writing. No output schema, but description compensates by explaining the response content. Lacks error handling details but sufficient for agent invocation.

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%, but description adds significant value by listing template-specific parameter examples (e.g., synth: waveform, filter; drum-machine: voices, morphX, morphY) with exact formats, going well beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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?

Clearly states it generates a Pd patch from a parameterized template, lists 11 specific templates, and distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_patch, validate_patch, and send_message. The verb 'Generate' and resource 'Pd patch' are specific.

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 instructs when to use (for template-based patches) and when not to (no file/shell operations after). Provides a clear STOP message and alternatives (e.g., optional outputPath only if user requests). This is comprehensive guidance.

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