generate_eloquent_model

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the included features (attributes, relationships, scopes, casts, observers, v13.2 features), but does not mention file creation location, overwrite behavior, or prerequisites. This is a moderate level of transparency for a code generator.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and feature list. It is efficient but somewhat of a run-on; a little more structure could improve readability without adding length.

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?

This is a complex tool with 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only scratches the surface by listing features, and fails to convey the generation workflow, prerequisites, or how parameters map to output, making it inadequate for full understanding.

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 only 31%, and the description does not explain the many undocumented parameters. It loosely references categories like relationships and casts, but leaves table, fields, timestamps, softDeletes, and other parameters without additional meaning.

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 it generates a Laravel 13.2 Eloquent model and lists distinguishing features (PHP 8.3 attributes, relationships, scopes, casts, observers, v13.2 features). This separates it from sibling tools like generate_observer or generate_policy, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 this tool: when you need an Eloquent model. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the context is clear enough that users can distinguish it from related generators.

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