init_qa_knowledge

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

With no annotations, description discloses idempotency, overwrite behavior, and that overwrite=true causes content loss. Adequately informs about file creation and side effects.

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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with purpose, and covers all essential aspects. Slightly dense but efficient.

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 simple parameter and no output schema, description is complete: explains what file is created, sections included, idempotency, recommended usage, and integration with other tools.

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% (overwrite param has description). The description adds value by explaining the backup recommendation and reinforcing the overwrite behavior beyond the schema.

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 creates a starter template 'qa-knowledge.md' with specific sections (Business Rules, Historical Bugs, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on initialization of a knowledge base, not analysis or test generation.

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?

Provides guidance on idempotency, recommends calling on first run, and explains downstream use (read by get_qa_context, used in generate_test). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but context is clear.

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