pm_init

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses key behaviors: dependency checking, config reading, setup guidance, and optional dev server start. However, it omits details about side effects (e.g., file creation, config changes) or required permissions.

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 no redundancy. First sentence front-loads the core purpose; second adds detail on optional server start. Every word serves a purpose.

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 no output schema and only two parameters with full schema coverage, the description covers the main workflow adequately. It could mention expected return values or post-initialization state, but overall it is sufficient for a straightforward initialization tool.

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 explains both parameters well. The description adds no new meaning beyond reiterating the 'optionally starts the dev server' for startDev, which is minimal enhancement. 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 verb 'Initialize' and the resource 'Puppet Master project', and specifies the actions of checking dependencies, reading config, and guiding through setup modes. It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like pm_dev and pm_build by highlighting its initialization role.

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 implies usage for initializing a project and optionally starting the dev server, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or how it differs from similar siblings like pm_setup. The context is clear but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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