demo2_scaffold_start

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It mentions returning a structured prompt but does not describe if the tool has side effects, whether it modifies state, or what the prompt format is. The behavioral disclosure is insufficient.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences. It front-loads the key action and adds detail in the second sentence. No unnecessary words.

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 simplicity (one param, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details about return value format, how the tool fits in the scaffolding workflow, and whether it is safe to call repeatedly.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for the single parameter, so the description adds minimal value beyond restating 'name'. It mentions 'name' in the context of the prompt but does not elaborate on the parameter's meaning or constraints.

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 states it begins project scaffolding and returns a structured prompt, which is somewhat clear. However, the description mentions choosing template and options, but the input schema only accepts a projectName, creating a mismatch. It also does not distinguish from the sibling tool demo2_scaffold_confirm.

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?

No usage context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus siblings like demo2_scaffold_confirm, nor does it mention prerequisites or follow-up actions.

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