harness_init

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses idempotency, default skip-exists, and overwrite behavior. Could mention return value or side effects, but current detail is sufficient for a scaffold tool.

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 sentences with no filler. First sentence defines action and location; second provides use case, idempotency, and overwrite flag. Every word earns its place.

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 initialization tool, the description covers purpose, usage trigger, and behavior. Missing return value description but output is a file creation; oversight is minor given no output schema.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by linking name to file path and explanation of overwrite, though it doesn't exhaustively detail name format constraints.

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 uses a specific verb ('Scaffold') and resource ('harness manifest'), specifies the output location pattern, and distinguishes from siblings like 'harness_describe' and 'identity' by stating it's for initializing a missing manifest.

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 states when to call ('when identity() reports a missing manifest') and documents idempotent behavior with overwrite option. Lacks explicit alternatives but context from sibling tools makes usage clear.

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