willys_setup_init

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses file creation, permissions (600), and return value, but does not address edge cases such as overwriting an existing .env or failure handling. This is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 two concise sentences in Swedish, each adding meaningful information: what the tool does, the output, and the next step. No wasted words.

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 simple setup tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers purpose, output, and next step, but could ideally mention if it overwrites an existing .env or any prerequisites beyond finding the store.

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 input schema already provides a detailed description for storeId, including lookup workflow and optional omission. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond that, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 creates a .env file, writes the store-ID, sets permissions to 600, and returns the file path. It also references willys_open_file as the next step, distinguishing it from sibling tools like willys_setup.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: use willys_find_stores first to get the store ID, then create the .env, and finally open it with willys_open_file. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like willys_setup.

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