preview_build_plan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose two useful traits—determinism and no bridge connection—which suggest a safe, offline preview. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are needed, or whether any state is modified.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler language. It is appropriately sized for the tool's apparent simplicity.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But the tool has no annotations, complete parameter documentation gaps, and the description provides no parameter semantics or safety details beyond determinism and offline use. For a tool with one undocumented required parameter and no annotations, the description is insufficiently 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 description coverage is 0% for the single required parameter 'build_plan'. The description does not mention the parameter, its expected format, or how to supply it. It fails to compensate for the complete absence of schema-level parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb (Generate) and resource (build-plan preview) with a key qualifier (deterministic, without bridge connection). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar build-related siblings like build_schematic or inspect_build_site.

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 phrase 'without bridge connection' implies a usage context (offline/preview scenarios), but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no alternatives named, and no exclusions. Usage is left to inference from the stated constraint.

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