scaffold_roles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool is offline and deterministic, and lists inputs. However, it does not describe the return value format, side effects, or exactly what is generated (e.g., files vs. console output). This leaves behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose and outputs, second lists inputs. Efficient and front-loaded, though a bullet list of inputs might improve scannability.

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 tool generates code snippets and a migration, the description lacks essential details about the output format (e.g., file paths, console output, or return structure). With no output schema, the description should compensate but does not.

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 good descriptions per parameter. The description only lists parameter names without adding new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 generates a role-table migration, requireRole gate snippet, and first-operator bootstrap for Run402 function role gates. This specific verb-resource combination and mention of Run402 distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are unrelated.

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 explicitly states the tool is offline and deterministic, and the context 'for Run402 function role gates' implies when to use. However, it does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives, though sibling tools offer no similar functionality.

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