사업계획서 PSST 골격 생성

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'does not fabricate founder facts'—a positive behavioral trait. However, lacks details on side effects, permissions, or what the tool does not do (e.g., no full plan generation).

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: first delivers main purpose upfront, second adds conditional behavior and inclusions. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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, so description must hint at return format. Mentions inclusions (diagrams, principles, checklist) but not structure. Could better explain integration with sibling tools, but sufficient for a generation 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context for grant_id (conditional notes) but does not elaborate on other parameters beyond what schema provides. Adequate but not exceptional.

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?

Clearly identifies action ('generates') and specific output ('4-section skeleton for PSST framework'), with distinct sections named. Implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'draft_section' and 'build_roadmap' by focusing on skeleton 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 clear context on when to use (with or without grant_id) and what customizations occur. Lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to alternatives, but usage is well implied.

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