write_file

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose critical behaviors such as the default overwrite behavior (overwrite=true, which is destructive) or encoding handling, leaving safety implications unclear.

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 very short (5 words) and efficiently conveys the core function without extraneous information. It is concise but not excessively under-specified.

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 having an output schema and full parameter documentation, the description lacks context about overwrite behavior, encoding defaults, and the tool's distinction from append_file. It is insufficient for safe use without additional knowledge.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not mention path, content, encoding, or overwrite parameters.

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 'Write content to a file' clearly states the tool's function with a verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'append_file', which also writes content but appends instead of overwriting.

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 such as 'append_file' or 'copy_file'. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred usage scenarios.

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