miniapp_generate_blueprint

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

No annotations exist, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states output concept but not technical behavior: whether it modifies files, returns data, requires permissions, or has side effects. Critical gaps for a generation tool.

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?

Single sentence is concise but not structured; lacks parameter breakdown or formatting. For a tool with 4 parameters, the description could be enhanced with bullet points or hints while remaining concise.

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?

Complex tool (generating blueprint with multiple components) but description is minimal. No output schema, no explanation of what 'blueprint' entails, no mention of limitations or dependencies. Insufficient for agent to fully understand context.

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 0% and description adds zero meaning to any of the 4 parameters (productName, brandName, depth, linkExistingProject). No explanation of what each parameter does or how to use them.

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 uses specific verb 'generate' and resource 'engineering blueprint for WeChat Mini Program product', detailing coverage from positioning to launch. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on analysis/optimization of existing projects.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description does not help the agent decide context for invocation.

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