init_design_md

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. The description adds context about the initialization sources but does not clarify whether the tool overwrites an existing file or fails. Given the destructiveHint annotation, the description could be more explicit about the overwriting behavior.

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 a single, well-structured sentence of 18 words. It front-loads the action and lists the sources efficiently, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and sources. It is mostly complete, but could be enhanced by specifying whether the tool overwrites an existing file, especially given the destructiveHint annotation.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The tool description merely repeats the source options and path purpose without adding new meaning or usage details beyond the schema.

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 that the tool initializes a DESIGN.md file from three specific sources: a stored Raven token system, a getdesign.md starter slug, or a blank template. The verb 'Initialize' and the listed sources make the purpose concrete and distinguish it from siblings like read_design_md or update_design_md.

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 implies when to use the tool (when initializing a DESIGN.md from given sources) but does not provide explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it. For example, it does not mention that one could use other tools for reading or updating an existing DESIGN.md.

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