Create Aura Event

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context beyond these by explaining the generation output (.evt scaffold), the two event types, and firing mechanisms. It does not contradict annotations, though it could disclose more about side effects or file handling.

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?

Three concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second explains the event types, and the third shows practical usage. No fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 scaffold generator with 4 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it generates, the two event variants, and how they are used. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but is otherwise complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions, so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It mentions 'Define event attributes with names and types', which slightly reinforces the attributes parameter, but the schema already documents this thoroughly. 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 'Generates an Aura Event scaffold (.evt file content)', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sf_create_platform_event by detailing COMPONENT vs APPLICATION events, which are Aura-specific concepts.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool: for creating Aura events, with explanation of event propagation and broadcasting. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the Aura-specific terminology and .evt file reference imply its niche well enough.

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