anb_render_to_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behaviors: writes to disk (mode 0600, overwrites), requires identity and Bob, never returns content, and rejects absolute paths/.. traversal. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences efficiently convey purpose, side effects, prerequisites, and constraints. Front-loaded with action and key details, no superfluous 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?

Given the output schema exists (not shown but indicated as true), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, side effects, prerequisites, input constraints, and behavior. No gaps identified.

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 the description adds value: clarifies out_path as relative to render dir with security constraints, and explains template placeholders. This is beyond what the schema provides.

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 renders a template with placeholders and writes to a file, with details on security and output. It explicitly contrasts with siblings by mentioning template rendering and file writing, distinguishing it from anb_exec, anb_list, anb_redact, and anb_status.

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 explains when to use (render and write secrets to a file), mentions side effects (writes file, overwrites), and prerequisites (enrolled identity, unlocked Bob). It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the sibling list implies context.

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