generate_controller

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions generation of a controller but does not disclose side effects like file creation, project structure modifications, or whether it can overwrite existing files. This is a significant gap for a code generator.

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 sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no redundant filler. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

Despite a rich schema with 6 parameters, the description lacks essential context about the tool's output and side effects. It does not mention that it generates a Java file, the package structure, or how it integrates with the Spring Boot project. With no output schema and no annotations, this is insufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3 regardless of extra context in the tool description. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so it does not exceed baseline.

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 tool generates a Spring Boot REST Controller with CRUD endpoints and exception handling. This is a specific verb-resource pair and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like generate_entity or generate_repository.

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?

Usage context is implied: the tool should be used when generating a controller for a Spring Boot entity. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or guidance on alternatives, such as mentioning that generate_service or generate_repository are for other layers.

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