Initialize a new registry

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

With no annotations, the description carries behavioral disclosure itself. It discloses that the tool creates files, that it fails on an existing registry, and that force=true is the escape hatch; combined with the force parameter description ('Overwrite an existing registry'), an agent understands the destructive potential.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence conveys action, artifact layout, and failure/force behavior with zero filler. Every clause adds decision-relevant information.

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 an initialization tool, it covers the main deliverables and the key failure mode, and the sibling list shows this is the creation entry point. It is missing how 'resolved registry path' is derived and what a successful response looks like, but those are secondary to safe usage.

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 description does not explain any parameter semantics; only force and designTool have schema descriptions. The required projectName and the projectDescription param are left undocumented in both the schema and description, weakening the agent's ability to fill them correctly.

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?

States a specific action ('Create a complete starter registry') with a precise resource path and file list (.design/registry/{manifest,components,tokens,patterns,rules}.json + README). The failure condition also separates it from sibling tools that read or modify an existing registry.

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?

Clearly implies the intended context: call when a new registry needs to be initialized at the resolved path. It also gives a key usage condition ('Fails if a registry already exists there unless force=true') that tells an agent when a parameter is needed, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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