nodejs_format

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'format code' but does not explain default behavior (e.g., whether it writes files or checks by default), side effects, or required permissions. The schema hints at write/check flags, but the description does not clarify their interaction.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the essential verb and resource. It contains no unnecessary words or details.

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 five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain the tool's typical workflow, defaults, or how to combine parameters (e.g., check vs write). A complete description for a formatting tool should clarify these behavioral aspects.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the tool description adds no value beyond the parameter names. It does not explain the purpose or typical usage of parameters like 'args', 'check', 'files', 'write', or 'directory' beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'format' and the resource 'code with Prettier'. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like eslint (linting) and yamllint (YAML linting) by specifying the specific formatter tool.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where eslint or other formatters might be more appropriate, nor does it provide when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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