Generate User Stories

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) already cover behavioral safety. Description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., output format, side effects). With rich annotations, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action verb, no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given full schema coverage and rich annotations, description is nearly complete. It specifies input and output (user stories, acceptance criteria, Mermaid diagrams). Minor gap: does not clarify whether output is returned directly or written to disk, but annotations imply read-only.

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 100%; each parameter already has clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, 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?

Description clearly states verb 'generates' and resource 'user stories with acceptance criteria and flow diagrams' and specifies input file 'SPECIFICATION.md'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sdd_generate_docs and sdd_generate_diagram by focusing on user stories.

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?

Description provides context by specifying input from SPECIFICATION.md, implying use when generating user stories from that file. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives cited amidst many sibling 'generate' tools.

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