onboarding_wizard

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks explicit disclosure of potential side effects like file writes (despite backupExisting parameter) and tool installation. It briefly mentions generation and verification but does not address destructive behavior or system modifications.

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?

Single sentence of 18 words efficiently conveys the core purpose. Could be more front-loaded, but no waste exists.

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 good parameter docs, the description omits expected outcomes, safety warnings, and whether the tool is interactive. For a complex setup tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, more behavioral context is needed.

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 describes all 8 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description adds no extra parameter-level meaning. 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 runs an onboarding wizard that detects project type, generates configuration, verifies tools, and validates setup. It distinguishes from sibling tools like detect_project, generate_config, and validate_setup by combining these steps.

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 the tool is for first-time project setup but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus individual sibling tools, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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