scaffold_roles

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

With no annotations, the description's mention of 'offline and deterministic' partially addresses behavioral traits (no network/project interaction). But it does not disclose side effects (e.g., file overwriting, idempotency), output format, or performance characteristics.

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 zero waste. First sentence states the purpose, second lists inputs and key characteristics. Front-loaded and 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?

No output schema, and description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., generated code as string, file creation, console output). For a moderately complex tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, this is a significant gap.

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 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description only lists inputs briefly ('table, user_col, role_col, roles[], cache_ttl') without adding deeper meaning 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?

Description clearly states the tool generates a role-table migration, requireRole gate snippet, and first-operator bootstrap for Run402 function role gates. Verb and resource are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on different tasks (e.g., deploy, manage users, etc.).

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?

Description mentions 'offline and deterministic (no project or network)', indicating it's safe for local development and has no external dependencies. However, it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or provide usage exclusions.

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