generate_windsurf_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states the tool generates a file but doesn't disclose whether it overwrites existing files, requires specific permissions, or handles errors. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and output. There's no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

For a tool that generates configuration files (a mutation operation) with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, and expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'projectName', 'languages', or 'description' mean in context. However, with only 3 parameters and no enums, the baseline is 3 as the schema provides basic structure without semantic clarity.

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 action ('Generates') and the specific output ('.windsurfrules file for Windsurf IDE'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_aider_config' or 'generate_cursor_rules' beyond specifying the target IDE, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'generate_claude_config' or 'generate_vscode_tasks', leaving the agent without context for selection.

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